AssemblyBoard

This post is for those in existing assemblies.

It has been said that those who are ignorant of history repeat it.

I’ve heard that some profound changes are taking place in some of the assemblies that still exist.  That is truly encouraging, but don’t settle for a merely repackaged assembly system.  2 Cor 7 speaks of zeal in repentance.  Expect that from the leaders.  In my opinion the changes will be in their attitude first, then their behavior.  Be patient, but if something looks wrong ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS!  FOLLOW UP!  GET OUTSIDE INPUT!  Don’t feel guilty about holding the leaders accountable.  Leaders should be held more accountable than non-leaders.  Leaders in the Geftakys ministry were not used to being held accountable except by those ABOVE them in rank.  You are not being ‘divisive’ if you ask questions that used to be forbidden.  You have a right to know (especially given the past).  While doing so, keep in mind this quote from the book entitled "Tired of Trying to Measure Up", by Jeff VanVonderen (pg. 70):

"…every time your pastor or Bible study leader speaks firmly to you or doesn’t accept your view, do not label him or her as spiritually abusive.  It’s a human trait to react defensively or to be slow in accepting opinions that are not ours.  If you have a problem with the way things are being conducted, go to your leader in a gentle, humble spirit and share your thoughts.  In a safe system, your confrontation should be welcomed, even if there is not full agreement.  However, change takes time, so if you are rebuffed, don’t automatically flash accusations."

The following questions will help you evaluate and participate in the process of change in your assembly:

1)  How much interaction is there between the assembly leaders and leaders of other churches?

2)  Are you uncomfortable about asking leaders of other churches what they think about the assembly?

3) Do the leaders encourage you to look at the website to learn the historical facts about the assembly, or do they drop subtle hints that the site is inappropriate in some way?

4) Do the leaders openly invite you to ask questions about the history of the assembly?

5) Do the leaders give vague or pat answers to your questions?

6) Do you think that if you ask certain questions regarding the history of the assembly the leaders will accuse you of being ‘suspicious’, or use some other means to make you feel like you just crossed an invisible line that you weren’t supposed to cross?

7) Do you sense that assembly history is a forbidden subject in the assembly (even when the leaders are not present)?

8) Are the leaders open to the idea of using some of the books and tapes that are listed on the AssemblyReflections website to help the saints learn from the past?  Other churches have cult workshops.  If you want to reduce the risk of being enslaved again in a yoke of bondage then it will help you if you learn about the dynamics of what makes these groups tick.  In my opinion now is the time to dive in and learn about these groups.  Sure, you will not always be thinking so much about these things, but it is one of the phases of getting on with your life.

9) Does your booktable have some of the books that are listed on the AssemblyReflections website?  This may not be necessary, but in my opinion it would be a good idea.

10) Are the finances handled openly with no pat excuses for secrecy such as, "Well, the Lord knows how to handle His money"?

Jack

Good post Jack!

Whoever said it is right "People are sheep and they need to follow a shepherd." If people have not learned that their was corruption in the assembly or that anything was wrong, the pattern will continue. I have watched people hold on til there was no more SLO assembly. They are waiting for the new one to rise up. They haven't learned. Old assembly traits still exist, sheep are still reading "The Testimony To Jesus" and they are still waiting. They don't talk and they certainly aren't reading the website. They are waiting. They are still following the old leaders to see what they will do. These people go to church in packs, there is no individuality. They choose not to hear the Shepherds voice because they are waiting for the human shepherd. The one to control them and tell them what to do. If this doesn't follow the analogy of dumb sheep I don't know what does!

Break away from the pack....

Heide

Jack,
     Thank you for an excellent post!  The Jeff VanVonderen quote is insightful, and your checklist offers ten very reasonable safeguards.
     BTW, in many cases those who AREN'T ignorant of history STILL repeat it!


MGov & Others with similar concerns,
     Checklists and guidelines are beneficial to many people, but they aren't law!  There is no hard & fast rule that you must submit to an unproved "authority" to walk with the Lord.  God has given his Spirit to each of us to guide us into all truth, so that we need not fear the guiles of the enemy or his human minions.
     The "Reflections" website has not been set up to take over our lives and demand how we should live them.  It is to offer help to those who need it and hope to those who are flagging.  "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." I Tim 1:7


Heide,
     At the risk of being the umpty-leventh one to bring up a baby/bathwater contrast, he Lord HAS referred to his people as both sheep and lambs, and he HAS appointed shepherds for them-- these things are not to be feared, but to be understood:  
     An under-shepherd must first be one of the sheep.
     The under-shepherd's job is to watch over the Lord's flock.
     The GOOD SHEPHERD has promised: "My sheep hear MY voice.
     The primary job of the under-shepherd, no matter how good, godly, wise or loving he may seem to be, is to EXALT the GOOD SHEPHERD, and to establish and build up the personal relationship between each of us and our Lord Jesus Christ.
     THAT'S ALL WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT IN ANOTHER:  IF ANYONE CLAIMS TO BE A SHEPHERD BUT IS DRAWING OUR ATTENTION ANYWHERE BUT TO THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, WE NEED TO SEPARATE OURSELVES FROM THAT ONE.
     We do not need to fear what men may try to do to us.  We need to keep our eyes, hearts and minds set upon the Lord, to trust him and believe his promises.  "What shall we say then to these things?  If God be for us, who can be against us?" Rom 8:31

                      I've seen the lightning flashing,
                I've heard the thunder roll,
                      I've felt sin's breakers crashing,
                Trying to conquer my soul,
                      I've heard the voice of my Savior,
                Telling me still to fight on,
                      He's promised never to leave me,
                Never to leave me Alone.

     "These things have I spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace.  In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." Jn 16:33

If anyone is interested, the Fullerton assembly mtg place has moved from Palm and Imperial into a much smaller place.  I have to admire these guys for trying to make a go of it.

Dear Verne,

So you heard it through the grapevine...

I see, so you heard that the St. Louis assembly believes that everything here is Satanic and false.  Well, if this is REALLY true and they REALLY believe that, then I think that have a point.  Here's why.

Dear Everyone,

This is what I believe the whole of this website(as well as most of its participants) depends on.  Where you see the "...", that's where I give you the opportunity to fill in the blanks.

• Half-truths: "So I heard, that she said, that he said..."
• Overexaggeration: "So George used all of our money to open an off-shore oil-drilling business!"  
• Assuming: "So that means that you are DEFENDING GEORGE!"
• Broad-brushing: "ALL the assemblies, ALL the teachings are wrong, heretical, and evil."
• Gossiping:  "Did you hear about St. Louis?  I heard they're still MEETING!  GOD FORBID!"
• Psychology: "According to Freud, that man is a psycho and should be put away."
• Fear: "I am afraid that he will become the next assembly leader."
• Acceptance:  "Agree with us, and you will be praised.  Disagree, and feel the wrath of the website."
• Pain:  "I was hurt and I can't let go of it."
• Anger:  "Anger is the first step towards healing."
• Opinion:  "Well, the assembly was NEVER brought together by God!  At least I think so."  "God judged the assembly!  The devil was never involved!"
• Excuses:  "The assembly made me who I am."  "The assembly is the reason that..."
• Criticism:  "He should have..."  "They are..."
• Suspicion:  "Something tells me..."  "So did you...?"
• Debate:  "We MUST talk!  That is the ONLY answer to healing!"
• Accusing: "THEY are wrong!"

Now these are some of the things that this website has not been depending on as much as they should:

• The Bible
• The Bible
• The Bible

The list could go on and on.  Wow!  Seems like you're becoming your own little cult here!  But you didn't here that from me.  It is time to wake up and smell the Folgers, folks.  How long will you go on with this?

Here's a little assumption from me for you:

It looks like the patients are running the asylum. ;D WEE HEE HEE HEE!!!  They're coming to take me away, ha ha...
   
Luke

Verne,

I didn't know that we had concluded yet that all assemblies should disband.  I know that there is a civil discussion on another thread going on in order to think out this issue.  From this post it seems like you've already decided....


Luke,

What was that(your post) all about??


M

Luke,

The things you have listed, what you believe “the whole of this website (as well as most of its participants) depends on,” is also what most people in the world rely on when seeking to understand the great puzzle that is reality.

Half-truths:  Who has the whole truth?  No human in this world.  We peer through a glass darkly.  The light in us could be darkness.  We do not know and see all there is to know and see but hopefully we try our best and are honest about it rather than hide finances, attempt to cover up abuse in the home of a prominent leading brother, etc.

Over exaggeration:  Yes, to make a point.  It is a common tactic to make a point.   Overused, though, in many cases, especially when used by George and others to talk about how godly and great George and his ministry are or how other churches are wrong or worldly.  

Assuming: Yes, we all do—hopefully based on the knowledge what we have… Unlike those in the old Assembly who assumed that everyone who was not “in fellowship” was settling for second best or had fallen away from the Lord.

Broad-brushing: Not everyone here does that, but I agree it is a pet peeve of mine.  I hated listening to George when he said how ALL the churches were worldly or did not have the light that God gave him.  

Gossiping:  Not excusing it because I hate gossiping too, but who does not gossip?  Gossiping is an attempt to spread and share information.  The point is:  SHOULD this information be shared and is the information correct?  Should the sins of the Geftakys Assembly be exposed?  Yes.  And were those in the old Assembly, especially workers in positions of prominence, famous for how they use to talk—gossip—about people?  YES!  

Psychology:  What is wrong with quoting authorities who have studied human nature?  People in the old Assembly would constantly quote what George or Betty or other spiritual brethren said or believed.  Ever hear of this title:  HANDBOOK OF HAPPINESS or something along those lines?  

Fear: You said, "I am afraid that he will become the next assembly leader."  Perfect love casts out fear.  Nobody is perfect, but many here do fear that others could get sucked into something that would rob them of their freedom Christ.    

Acceptance:  You wrote, "Agree with us, and you will be praised.  Disagree, and feel the wrath of the website."  In the case of the old Assembly, it was the wrath/disapproval of the leadership who would approach you because they don’t accept how you have acted or believed simply because it goes against what is acceptable to do or believe in the Assembly.

Pain:  You wrote, "I was hurt and I can't let go of it."  Pain is a normal part of healing.  But the goal is to forgive and move beyond your hurt.  This BB is part of the process.

Anger:  You wrote, "Anger is the first step towards healing."  It IS one of the first steps.  But, like I wrote about pain, the goal is to the goal is to forgive and move beyond your hurt.  This BB is part of the process.

Opinion:  We are all entitled to our opinion and share it here.  I agree that it is a waste of time to talk about some things like if God was ever in the Assembly—in areas that are not clear we should, as the Scriptures say, “All each to be fully convinced in their own mind.”  So, Luke and others, you have to allow people to have and share their own opinions UNLIKE the old Assembly that expected its members to conform in thought and deed.  Godly counsel was never advice or opinion--you were expected to follow other people's "opinions."

Excuses:  There is a thin line between reasons and excuses.  Reasons are based on reality, excuses on a desire to justify oneself.  We are still waiting for reasons or excuses from those like George who probably cannot justify themselves due to the simple fact that they were exposed.  

Criticism:  Many people in the old Assembly were experts at criticizing anything that was different than the Assembly or went against the Assembly’s dogmatic view of the will of God.  Criticism was a common part of participating in the old Assembly.

Suspicion:  “Why didn’t you come to the meeting last night?  You seemed to be fine when I saw you last.  Are you trying to miss the divine appointments, brother?”  (You clearly did not have a good enough excuse to miss a meeting.)  “Are you still walking with the Lord?” (You probably are not because you decided to go to a wordly church.) "You got up late today, Sister.  Did you have enough time for a morning time?"  

Debate:  This was not allowed in the old Assembly to go on at any length and the person had to fain that they agreed with the Assembly’s conception of the truth or they would be “convinced” or “sat down” to be “exhorted” about The Truth.  There was never any debates because the old Assembly had all the answers... or at least most of them.  

Accusing: Many people in the old Assembly were experts at accusing others of wrongdoing inside and outside of the Assembly.  Most of the stuff here, apart from some things by Bluejay, are simply stating facts about the sins of the Geftakys ministry.  We don’t always speak the truth in love, but I trust we do our best.  

Now what sort of things did the old Assembly depend on?
1.  George’s interpretation of the Bible that was seen as “The Truth” or “the will of God.”  George clearly relied on the Bible because he would quote about 23.4 verses at once that MAYBE had something to do with what he was attempting to say.  (There is a bit of “over exaggeration” for you for the sake of humor and to make a point that George’s scripture blitzes did little to benefit what he was attempting to say.)  As to your comment about the Bible:  The Bible has to be interpreted so there is no perfect access to the Bible and its divine truth.
2. Dogmatism.  What the old Assembly belief system dictated was the truth or God’s will for your life and beliefs.  
3. Authoritarianism.  As a saint in committed fellowship, you need to submit to the authority of the leading brothers.  Individuality and personal belief are steamrolled through a variety of means like “being approached by the leadership,” etc.
4. And all of the things you mentioned above like broad-brushing, accusations, gossip, etc.  

As you said, the list could go on.  And your comment about this BB becoming a cult is simply laughable… and plain dumb.  Here people are allowed to come and go as they please, there is no plea for money, there is no ONE voice or charismatic leader to follow, there is no revered inner circle that I am aware of, people are not dependent on this board for their mental and emotional well-being, people are allowed to share their views freely, there is no set dogma that one must believe in, etc.  This is an online community that consists of members who have escaped from a cult.  Nobody perfect meets here on this BB, but at least we have freedom to share as brothers and sisters without fear that our beliefs will be devalued simply because they go against the status quo of a former cult leader and the system that he established.  How long will this go on?  I don’t know… as long as it takes people to work through their involvement in a system that robbed them of their freedom in Christ.  

But, Verne, it is also a person's freedom to decide to stay in a place that others have come to see is a place of bondage.  

I know of one place where the people there are seeking God as to what they want him to change.  We are all imperfect and no place is perfect... including this BB.  However, there are a lot of dear people inside and outside of the old Assembly system and some of those people are on this BB.  Thank God for this BB.

I was offended by your stement that Luke's comment was dumb.  Open communication is not only for those who want to 'blast' the assembly system, but also for those who have a perspective that might be sympathetic to the assemblies.

M

I has been a while since I have posted here and I just plain forgot to put in my smilies when responding to Luke's post.   :)   But if I offended anyone, let me make clear that I was attacking the arguement, not the person who I hinted was "dumb" or "not having the capability to process data."  I did not say "stupid" which would have been a judgement on that person's intelligence and we know what the Bible says about calling a person "raka" or "empty head."  Yes, "dumb" can be used in a similar way to "stupid" but dumb can also mean "a: markedly lacking in intelligence b : showing a lack of intelligence c : having little or no meaning."  B and C is what I meant to convey.  I wrote my post to defend the virtues of this board despite its imprefections, imperfections that were far more rampant in the old Assembly system.

Thanks for believing the best, Verne.  :)  

I don't think I can lighten up VC; You may not have noticed, but I have a very serious personality.


Brother William Jones, (I am not your Mum) :)

I really don't want to beat this to bits, but I must compete with Grandma Sperling if I am to make it into the women preachers hall of fame. Both B and C indicate that you were telling Luke that he showed a lack of intelligence, and that his post had little or no meaning (BTW it did to him and possibly others as well).
Also, I don't know if it is necessary to defend the BB. State your points (which may be contrary to anothers' opinion).

M

oh my GOODNESS! Couldn't you have just said "Luke, sorry I said that your post was "plain dumb" instead of these convoluted posts from you and Verne trying to explain yourselves?

Some of you might be interested in this:

Disclaimer: my opinion on this is biased.  I am simply trying to give you the facts.  You decide if it is right or wrong.

This last Sunday, Tim Geftakys was the main preacher at the Assembly-lite meeting in Fullerton.

Normally, he has been careful to make a strong contribution in giving out hymns and praying, but has been showing some deference and restraint with regard to teaching and preaching.

This time, the person who appears to be his main restraining influence, Mark Miller, was not present.  So, Tim was back in place as the main speaker/teacher.

Mark Miller has reportedly NOT been exhibiting signs of trying to re-establish leadership.  On the contrary, he has been behaving in a manner far more befitting a former elder under George Geftakys.

---

Above are the facts.  Now, I will take some liberty and give you my opinion.  I would like to warn Timothy to not take up the mantel of leadership.  It hasn't even been six months since he was "surprised" by his father's decades old lifestyle of sin, not to mention his complicity in his brother David's abusive ways.

Tim himself has disciplined many a young brother to not partake of the Lord's supper, or teach at all, for a year or more, and here he is anchoring the ministry again?

Rhetorically speaking, let's give Tim the benefit of the doubt:

He didn't know about his brother
He didn't know about his father
He heard all the rumors, and read all the papers, and never investigated their claim.
He was present during his father's false apology in SLO, and apparently bought into it.  He sat inside, while he knew that many people were at the door and not being allowed in.

For many years he has been one of the main leaders under his father, and has made no qualms for being considered a heavyweight (not meant to be a joke) when it came to what the ministry believed.

So, he saw himself as a strong leader, but was too blind to see the obvious sin going on in his own family?

Is this the kind of man you want teaching the congregation at your church on Sunday morning?

Now, if we don't give him the benefit of the doubt....


Brent

What kind of circus is this anyway??? What an absolute fiasco!!!  What kind of absolute imbasals are still involved in a church where a guy like Tim Geftakys is giving ministry???  This is borderline hilarious!  What could Tim Geftakys possibly be preaching about???

I can just hear him...

"Today dear friends, we are going to teach about the art of receiving back rubs.  However, please give me a moment while I finish my banana split".

Brent - I got to say that for the first time, I finally disagree with you.  Why on earth would anyone give this heavyweight (And yes I do mean that literally) any sort of the benefit of the doubt???  What business does he have possibly being in any sort of leadership position.

My question to all of you (guests included) who are still involved in any part of this ministry...What color is the sky in your world???
 

Whoa!  Don't you think that is pretty strong language?  You are supposed to be one of my minions, who do everything I say.  By the way, we have never met, but I like you on the BB.

No, I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt, because there is no doubt.  I was just rhetorically giving him the benefit of the doubt, in order to demonstrate the pure stupidity of having him lead.  The only thing that can be done right now is to stand back, and stay out of the way.  Ely's son appears to be getting ready to take the ark into battle.  If David shows up at a meeting, I suggest getting as far away as possible.

Brent

This reminds me of a 80's B-movie called "The Stuff."  
It's kind of like a re-make of "The Blob," where they turn the blob into a yogurt-style custard dessert.  "It's just a simple, good - tasting dessert product you can find on your grocery shelf. But are you eating it...or is it eating you?"
There's a comercial for it with the catchy jingle:  "Enough is never enough, of The Stuff!"  It soon becomes the most popular dessert.
Only problem is that people who eat it get eaten from the inside and pretty soon turn into a hollow shell with nothing but the "Stuff" on the inside.  
(http://www.badmovies.org/movies/thestuff/thestuff1.jpg)


Anyways, after it was exposed for the harmful life-form that it was and there was mass burnings of "The Stuff" cartons accross America.   But some execs thought it would be great to bring it back in a watered-down, "harmless", version called "The Taste".  "Each carton contains only 5%", they touted.  
Well, 5% stricknine will still get you killed.   Similar with Geftakys-lite.

I think existing assemblies are more of a circus act than Barnum and Bailey's.

Hi Luke and Others! :)
  It is good to hear from you again, though I must disagree with your view.
   It is difficult to respond to your castigation of the BB as you have leveled many charges, but you have not been specific.
   I will not pile on here with a point by point rebuttal, but I think Will had some really great answers in his response to you.
  His point regarding interpretation of the Bible is a very good one and one I've tried to make in the past as well.  What I see in his recollection of GG scripture barrages is the fact that a myriad of Bible verses do not a coherent theology make, nor does it provide light to the world.
   To limit discussion on the BB to a "spiritual dimension" where we must provide proof texts for every sentence would not reflect a true spirituality.  On this kind of plane humanity has no place, and a kind of false reality is created.
This false reality never asks the question, "what is really going on in my life?  There is a kind of separation between what I believe, and my own experience.
   An example of the above would be those who believe in sinless perfection.  They have honed an argument and approach all dissenters with their irrefutable logic, but meanwhile they deny the rampant sin in their own hearts.
   If my comments above fit your "psychological profile" then I understand why you say what you said, but I don't see it as psychology.  I see it as just being a plain ol' human sinner saved by grace who is honest and humble in his pursuit of God.
                               God Bless, Mark  

You're kind of late, Mark. Luke got rid of his account a while ago and we have moved on from that post. I'm not surprised though that you disagree with him - sometimes the truth hurts. But then again the truth will set you free. Take care, Mark.

- Matt

GG used to gleefully tell the story how his noble Greek brethren in Greece upon discovering that a local minister there was involved in corruption gathered at the meeting shouting in unity " HE IS NOT WORTHY", "HE IS NOT WORTHY" because he was unfit for service in the house of God.
 I would like to start a collection to fly those noble brethren to where Tim is preaching,

Hi Matt! :)
  You'll have to excuse me for my tardinesss Matt, but I just now noticed this thread's existence (some Moderator, huh :) ;))
  I do hope Luke continues to post and if not post then read.  
  There is much to be gained from allowing our positions to be challenged.  Paul reasoned in the Scripture with those who were interested; some listened, and some departed after only one word.  I think those who stayed and talked were better off than those who left the discussion.
   God's truth only hurts those who reject it; for those that receive it, freedom is gained.  Our interaction helps us to see that sometimes our strongly held opinions are wrong and reveals a falsely held bias that we may have had.  
     Since all of us see through a glass darkly regarding many things (especially re. ourselves) humble discussion can be a wonderful way to dispel some of that darkness.
    I can attest to such a work in my own heart from interaction on this BB, and there are many others who can also give testimony to this fact.
  Yes, there is a risk of miscommunication, of evil persons falsely accusing us, of us having to admit to making a mistake; but if we don't take the risk of  thinking/talking about these things we may lose the opportunity of learning some precious lessons.
   My desire, along with most on this BB, is to really gain God's insight into who He really is, what the Gospel really is, and what does it all mean for my life now.  If our discoveries challenge our views we must be willing to change.  
                               God Bless,  Mark  
 

Should TimG just abandon those who are looking to him for continuity?
Does the fact that he is very humbled by this whole situation, change anything?

M

I paid one visit to the Fullerton assembly after the fall of GG and heard Tim G. give a short "word".  It was a collection of irrelevent verses that made it sound as if God had given them a promise to "do a new thing".  

As far as I could see it was a continuation of the false mysticisim that so pervades the minds of the assembly folks.  It showed me that there is a continuation there of the bogus ideas that Plymouth Bretherenism promotes.

As to the degree of Tim's "humbling", I have no idea.  :-\

Mgov, how do you know?

Thomas

Here is the deal, Tim has been asked to lead, but everyone in his Assembly-lite insists that he isn't leading.  Typical Geftakys double-speak.  This is the first warning that something is very wrong.

Eric Farian was a full-time worker in San Diego.  I didn't know that he and Tim were going into business together, but if they are, I fear for Eric.  Tim hasn't had a job since highschool, and he really knows how to spend  money.

The fact that he lost all is a sad by-product that often comes about when cult leaders are exposed.  I do feel bad about this, but it doesn't change the fact that Tim was complicit, at the highest levels.  Please note, the rest of George's family hasn't been hurt.  They weren't involved in "uncle George's cult."  (That is what his nephew told me)

Should he abandon those who are looking to him for continuity?

Good question.  The answer is no, he shouldn't abandon them.  Instead, he should carefully explain to them why it is wrong for them to feel like they need him.  He needs to tell them what kind of man he is, and how blind and/or corrupt he was when he was leading, and then tell them that because he loves them, he can't lead them.  He should insist that the group get
input from outside the carcass.

Does the fact that he has been humbled change the situation?

No, humility and sorrow does not bring victims of drunk drivers back from the dead, neither does it make pregnant 15 year old girls un-pregnant.  Esau was sorry, and shed many tears over his loss, but couldn't seem to repent.

Humility may very well change a person's future, but it can't change the past. Tim's past demands that he not repeat the same thing in the future, which is exactly what he is doing, by leading.

Brent

BTW, in the last 4 months, how has Tim demonstrated this amazing degree of humility?  

Eric Ferrien was not a full-time worker in San Diego - he was a leading brother. I hope you're not going to start in now on the Ferrien family.

Brent asked:
BTW, in the last 4 months, how has Tim demonstrated this amazing degree of humility?

Thomas asked:
As to the degree of Tim's "humbling", I have no idea.  
Mgov, how do you know?

I asked:
Does the fact that he is very humbled by this whole situation, change anything?

Having an unrepentant father.
Having a brother whose initials are DG.
Having all you have labored for the last 30(?) years come crashing down.
Having sacrificed a career for the sake of 'the work'.
Assembly-lite from assembly-strong.
etc. etc. etc.

These are the humbling experiences that I was referring to.

M

MGov listed the following factors in Tim Geftakys' life:
..............................................................
Having an unrepentant father.
Having a brother whose initials are DG.
Having all you have labored for the last 30(?) years come crashing down.
Having sacrificed a career for the sake of 'the work'.
Assembly-lite from assembly-strong.
etc. etc. etc.

These are the humbling experiences that I was referring to.
................................................................

These experiences COULD BE humbling,
but ONLY to someone who is already humble at heart.

al Hartman

Eric indeed was a full-time worker, along with Tim G. , Mike Zack, Danny Edwards,  George G., David G. and Jim Hayman, although the latter was removed a year prior to the collapse.  

I thought we would start in on the Ferrien family in the same way "we" did on Tony Edward's family.  Are you OK with this Matt, or is it different because Tony was not a leader and Eric was?  When you say, "start in now on the Ferrien family," do you mean like "we" did to Tony Edwards?

Can someone please send a false email out on Eric?

(In case anyone is worried, I am only making a point here, no one  is going to treat the Ferrrien's in the manner that Tony Edward's was treated.  No, "we" will just stick to the facts.  He was indeed a full-time worker AND a leading brother.  Matt, ALL full-time workers were also leading brothers, and several of them elders as well.)

Brent

Matt is correct in his statement.  Eric was only a 'full time' worker after he returned to Fullerton about a year ago.

M

Oh?  So he was a full-time worker, but not when he was in San Diego?  Where did he live last December, in Fullerton or SD?

I know that it is slanderous to be called a full-time worker, so I don't want to call him that in the wrong town, but I do KNOW that he was a FTW.  If I have his city of FTW wrong, I apologize for my error!  

Did he ever travel to SD to teach and counsel as a FTW?

This is a major point, and I want to make sure we get it right!  ;)

Brent,
He moved to Fullerton when he became a full-time worker. He was never a full-time worker in SD. You are correct about him working with Tim G in some printing business. I cannot say for sure if he ever traveled here to counsel - I was out of the assembly by then.

Sorry, but I must.  If I may...

--Like father like son.  Tim was doing all of the same things, wasn't he?  I would venture to say that Tim's crimes were at least as bad if not worse than his father's.  At a get-together for a couple who was being sent out into "the work" in Madison, Wisconsin, a video was played of George and Tim giving their approval.  What was telling in that video is that at first the camera was focused on George.  He looked a bit old and tired, he said a few words, but then you see a hand come down on his arm.  George stops what he is saying and the camera pans up to show Tim in full view.  From then on, it was Tim's show.  Get the picture?

--David was in some respects the scapegoat. His obvious problems were something to divert attention away from Tim and George's more heinous crimes done in secret.

--Wow, did I read that right?  Oh, are you referring to the mafia-like racket, of which Tim and George were the ring-leaders--who embezzled millions of dollars from God's people under the guise that it was "for the work of the Lord"?  Yeah, I guess that would be pretty humiliating to have that come crashing down.

--Heh, kinda like a drug-dealer makes the huge sacrifice of not taking a regular job.

--After the cats out of the bag, laying low for a while, then trying to get the racket going again to squeeze a few more bucks out of whatever person who would be dumb enough to fall into the trap marked with the flashing "Don't fall into the trap" signs.  

Yes, I guess that could be seen as being humiliating.

Arthur

Arthur,

You are the man!!!

I couldn't of said it better myself.

Here is an interesting take on the topic of Tim Geftakys's fitness to lead.

Only a few people are willing to defend George in public.  Virtually no one is willing to defend David.  He seems to be the expendable Geftakys, at least recently.

Tim has actually managed to garner the most support, with some people even suggesting that  he is innocent, while others speculate that perhaps he has repented in humility.

Here is what a true insider had to say, back in January:

"Any attempt to use David further as their “fall guy” is more than I’m willing to ignore.  They KNOW that among them, David is the least cunning and his parents and brother have used his arrogance and the fact that he is not bright to serve them his whole life. If this sounds like I think David is a victim, in only this way I do."

This person who said this was very close to the family, and had been involved in the Assembly since before David's marriage to Judy.  Their assertion is that George and Tim were fully aware of what went on, and found that David's problems were useful in a way, in order to place blame on a poor guy with diabetes.  It's not George that is the problem, it's David's poor health.  "Poor guy, he is doing the best he can, trust the Lord for him, will you?"

This strategy worked well for many years:  "Oh, no, the ministry isn't like that!  Maybe in SLO they have problems, but that is isolated."

The bigger problem is that George knew all along, and did nothing because his problems were far worse!  Not only that, he was afraid that David might still have a vestige of a spine, and perhaps could have told about George's problems."

The same person wrote:

"I don’t know what it will take, but I am not going to sit by and watch Tim & Ginger start their ministry out of their home. That is EXACTLY what George and Betty did 35 years ago. George was disgraced for having an affair at his old church, and he and Betty relocated. (David told me he met the girlfriend before his dad took off with her for close to a month. When George came back, Betty never lost the control to run things behind the scenes). They started a Bible study in their home and the rest is our history. Tim Geftakys knew first hand about the kind of physical abuse his brother practiced and his mother and father condoned. He is just hoping it doesn’t count in his case."

Here is the sticky part.  There are no doubt several quite foolish people who want Tim to lead them.   However, while Tim's character may not count with them, it most certainly does count with God.  Please understand, I am not saying that people are not free to meet in an Assembly-lite.  I am saying that they are quite foolish for asking Tim to lead them.  

"Well, the dog has only bitten the kids twice, I think it will be OK now.....it had its tail between its legs after the last bite....."

Brent

Is this verified to be true?
How is it possible that TG was unaware of his Dad's absence 'for close to a month'?
Maybe he thought that his dad had gone on a business trip, or maybe he was too young at the time, or...

M

Yes, this is verified, by witnesses.  If it wasn't, I would not have said it.  Tim was young at the time.  However, I don't know if during this period George was absent, or not.

I know of one family, totally unrelated to the Assembly, where this very thing is going on, and the husband returned home for the first few months to tuck the kids in bed!  I have no idea what sort of "arrangement," George and Betty had at the time, but I do what they did afterward, and it is alluded to in the letter.

Perhaps George repented of his infidelity?......oh, I forgot, he was carrying on for the last 20 years, at least.  

Well, he's the Lord's Servant, we shouldn't judge him, right?
The Lord did a mighty work through him, right?

Well, just because Tim was trained by his Dad, and has never known anything else doesn't mean Tim is not totally equipped to lead, right?

Brent

Dear Saints who are asking Tim G to lead you,

You are being very foolish because Brent Tr0ckman says so:


He bases his opinion on this:


Sadly, Brent knows Tim G's heart and thus he knows that Tim has "never known anything else" but GG and not God.  It doesn't matter if Tim G. repents. It doesn't matter if he is humble. Even though the Lord changes hearts, even though the Lord forgives one's past - it doesn't matter because Brent doesn't forgive one's past and Brent doesn't change hearts. Even now, I'm giving Tim G. the worst case scenario...I could say he was an ax-murderer and say the same. I, however, have heard him preach. I have seen him labor on campuses - he's quite capable and a man of God. If the saints feel led to have Tim G. teach them, who is Brent to tell them otherwise?

Brent,
I know you are going to leap on that "Tim G is a man of God" like a Frenchie on a prostitute (sorry if that's vulgar, but this bb is a filthy place). If it were by your standards, and not the Bible's, all church leadership would be illegitimate because there would be nobody with a perfect, sinless life to lead it. Let's examine this:

1) You said all the LB's were "sharer in sins" of DG and GG's crimes because they promoted a man who commited adultery and a man who beat his wife. When you finally had to admit that the vast majority of LB's didn't know about this, you had to move on to something else.

2) So Andrea Denner came up with a handy little theory that all the LB's "allowed" GG to be arrogant, you gleefully agreed. I said that anybody could find a sin on a church leader and pin him to it. He could be prideful, envious, idle, lack of charity, etc, etc, and for those reasons be unfit for leadership. What choice did the LB's have but to "allow" GG to be a sinner? Like I said, that's like "allowing" the grass to be green or "allowing" water to freeze at 32 degrees. You're "allowing" the inevitable. Nowhere in scripture does it say that a requirement for being a church leader is to be sinless.

3) When you saw that didn't pan out, you clapped your hands when Lurker asserted that the LB's are responsible because GG taught false doctrine. I asserted that nobody has perfect doctrine but Jesus Christ. Every church leader is illegitmate then because none of them are without false doctrine.

4) Of course, you are still undecided as to if the assembly was a Christian church or a cult. You never did give me a direct answer. You've implied that assembly wasn't a christian church, in which case the LB's weren't elders of a christian church, and thus aren't accountable to anybody.

As you can see, by Brent's standards, nobody is fit for a church leadership position. If any leading brothers read this, please take comfort that Brent's standards aren't consistent with the Bible's. Praise the Lord that it doesn't say in the Bible that perfection is required to be leaders.

Now, saints in Fullerton. If you feel led to have Tim G. teach you and he feels led to teach you, then do what the Lord says, not what Brent says! To listen to Brent over the Lord, or to base standards of leadership on Brent's standards would be..um...what's the word Brent used? foolish?

Before I go, I just couldn't resist:



couldn't of? Do you mean couldn't have? And this is the man who claims Tim G is illiterate?

MGov: Don't take this the wrong way - it's not personal. If you could wait a while until others have responded to this post, I'd appreciate it. I'd like to see some people who take stands post first - not a fence sitter. Not that there's anything wrong with sitting on the fence - peace weavers are always important. But sometimes we have to stand for something and not be wishy-washy in the face of adversity.

Thanks for the imagry, Matt.  Am I to assume that you are not a "fence sitter?"  

I don't feel like playing tic-tac-toe today, so I am not going to re-answer your questions, unless you agree to my terms, as stated before:  quote from Brent on May 16th.

Please ignore the coach part, since you aren't in contact with anyone who is influencing your thoughts.

So, if you are going to grandstand, you can't walkaway when someone responds to you.  I don't think anyone is fooled.

Also, I know plenty of pastors who I consider legitimate Christian leaders.  If you agree to adult rules of debate, my first question is:

Do you know what a straw man argument is?

Brent

Dear Matt and other 'non-fence sitters'.
  Please Matt, refrain from using profane language even in a place that you feel is filthy.  Besides the obvious lack of logic in the above action it is contrary to your user agreement.
   I am not saying you must change your argument or even that you must moderate your tone.  Thanks :)

  Re. some of your defenses of Tim G.:
    You are quite right that we have no idea concerning the condition of Tim G.'s heart or sincerity, but this is not the issue.  I have talked with some very sincere Mormons who display a very honorable character in their lives, but again this is not the issue; we're talking about "Christian" leadership here.
   The Bible teaches that if we are to be leaders we must not only have godly behavior, but must have a sound grasp on the Gospel.  The latter 'must have' would exclude the good moral Mormon above.  
   Tim G. must first unlearn the false teaching he was raised on and be instructed re. the true doctrine of the grace of God before he can adequately lead.
   There is another aspect to unlearning, and that is the authoritarian structure established by GG that Tim G supported.  If a former leader refuses to even consider their past involvement as a leader in an abusive system they are in serious denial (I don't know if he is or isn't, but it would take time for that process; more than a few months.).
   There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking the road of humility and listening to the many Christian voices who have suggested that the Assembly had serious problems.  One is free to disagree and to do whatever they want, but the lack of willingness for personal scutiny is of itself a disqualification for leadership.
  I have said many times (as have others) it is not that Tim G. is a sinner, for we all are sinners.  Nor is it a witch hunt to try and smear former leaders, but a need to deal with sins that have been covered up and denied.
   The most serious problems in the Assembly were not GG's adultery/tolerance of abuse, but his lack of honestly facing what he did.  "But, Tim didn't do any of this," some may protest!  As in the church of Laodicea Christ rebuked the entire church as one, for the character of the ministry was tainted by the character of the leaders (character counts).
   The entire Assembly character must be cleared and that comes from following the 2 Cor. 7 instruction in re. to church repentance (again, the whole church).  Refusal to zealously accept the criticism of Paul to Corinth, or the rebuke of Jesus to Laodicea, would lead to only one thing: the removal of the presence of Jesus in that group.
    The above correction from Jesus and Paul was not meant to destroy individuals or ruin their families, but to rescue them from a toxic faith that was harmful to them and others.
   Again, we know not where Tim G.'s heart is and that is why Paul and Jesus called for specific acts to demonstrate where their hearts were (i.e., acceptance of comments that are critical of their behavior, agreement that they were wrong, and a zeal to make things right with those wronged.).
  If one takes the 'O.J. defense' style of approach to Christian entreaty they are attempting to subvert the very means whereby God seeks to rescue them.  I'm sure there were individuals in Corinth and Laodicea that felt Jesus'/Paul's view of their groups' was not exactly accurate in their individual case, but to resist entreaty on such grounds is not acceptable to God.
   To see those calling for clarity re. former leaders of the Assembly as being "evil and filthy" could be taking the Devil's side in the argument, and put one in danger of rejecting the knock of Jesus at our door.
                             God Bless,  Mark

   

Gladly.



I
 don't know. We've seen how dangerous and wild your assumptions are. Maybe it's best for you not to assume.



Wait a second. Am I to believe that you are not answering my questions merely because you think I won't like the answers? Or I won't like the questions you pose to me? That's never stopped you before. What's the real reason you've avoided so many questions?


Did I read this right? You're accusing me of walking away? When you're the one who stopped our conversation in the "why leaders are responsible thread?!" LOL because it was unprofitable lol. No, sir - that's ridiculous. I don't think anyone was fooled by that either lol.



Sure do. It's when an opponent takes the original argument of an adversary and then provides a close imitation or "straw man"  version of the original argument. He then proceeds to knock down the straw man version of his argument. You've been guilty of that for quite a while. You use the LB's as your straw man and continually bash them down. It's like when I said that not all LB's knew about DG's wife beating. You set up the LB's as your straw man and knocked them down with "well, they should known and therefore are guilty." Yes, the LB's are guilty for not being omniscient.

I'm concerned about your comments regarding "playing fair." You have been known to manipulate situations on this bb. You told me once on this bb that you have no extra priviledges on this board than I. However, we saw that wasn't true when you posted your emails to Brian and Mark C. We see that you can just announce to Brian that you "need" administrative status at any time and you can also demand IP numbers from Mark C. at any time. Considering your abusive treatment of the younger brethren on this bb, it's kind of scary that you have the same power as the moderators. Hardly fair, I'd say. hmm, sir?
Lord bless.
- Matt

My Ten year old was playing "guns," with a 6 year old the other day.  He was doing this more as a favor to the younger boy, although he did have a bit of fun as well.  However, after a period of time, he became weary of the game, because the younger boy would never admit being shot.  He always claimed that my son missed him, or that he was bullet proof.  At one point, he demanded that my son, the ten year-old, was dead, because he, the six year-old, had a gun that could shoot around corners, possibly some sort of smart weapon.  

No matter how superior my son's stalking and shooting skills were, he could never seem to score, even with point blank shots to the head!  Soon, his focus was on getting the other boy to play another game.

Mark, can I please hide behind your last answer to Matt?  I don't feel I have the capacity to debate Matt.

Brent

I have read this thread off and on for several days now.  It seems to me that a lot of wheel spinning has been going on.  There are some folks who defend the assembly system or Tim Geftakys, and as far as I can see haven't conceded anything.  So...what's the profit in continuing?

I, as I have said, know nothing of Tim Geftakys' moral condition or intentions.  However I can say this quite confidently...anyone who supports the assembly system has some erroneous ideas about the Bible, the Church, and the Christian life in general.

1. The Bible...I attended a Wednesday night meeting in the Fullerton assembly a couple of weeks after GG's excommunication.  Tim G. got up and gave a "word of encouragement".  He read Isiah 43:19, "Behold, I will do something new, now it will spring forth...".   He made several statements about "God has raised up this work", and went on for a short while about how God was "with us" and so on.

When he did this, he was showing just how poorly he understands his Bible.  The verse is talking about God bringing back the captives from Babylon and rebuilding the city and temple.  Which He did!  What it has to do with the collapse of GG's assembly system is beyond me.  

GG used to use this technique of stringing together verses to produce FEELINGS in his followers, he called it "annointed ministry".  I'm not saying that sound teaching cannot produce emotions, but to qualify as sound it has to communicate TRUTH.  Since many people responded with "amen" to his statements, it is evident that the former state of ignorance still continues, both in preacher and hearers.

2. The Church...The assembly is founded upon the idea that God has an ideal "pattern" for the Church and it is our responsibility to figure it out and follow it.  God, it seems, spends a lot of time hoping that his people will arrange the chairs correctly and especially GOVERN the Church correctly.

Years ago, it dawned on me that the New Testament NOWHERE teaches the New Testament Pattern of Worship that they believe they are following.  They use the term "break bread" or "breaking of bread" as if it ONLY meant "to observe the Lord's Supper".   In fact, it frequently means to eat together.  Luke 24: 30-31, Acts 2:42 and 2:46, Acts 20:7, 11.  They have turned the Lord's Supper into the "Plymouth Bretheren MASS".

I mean this quite literally.  The idea is that God is pleased by a proper performance of this ritual and that he will confer his blessing (grace) on those who do it correctly in heart and form.  Of course, anyone who has sin in his life must be excluded, or God will be offended and withold his blessing, (grace), or even abandon them.

In other words, these folks are WORKING TO EARN GOD'S GRACE EVERY SUNDAY MORNING.  I don't say that lightly, but that really is what GG taught.  It is exactly what all PB's believe.  They would deny this vehemently, but only because they haven't made a logical analysis of the implications of their beliefs.

3. On how one lives the Christian life, they strongly advocate the idea of a "subjective leading".  The night I was there I was told by one brother that they were "waiting on the lord" to show them what to do.
I asked, "How will you know that God has shown you?"

The answer was that "when we are all of one mind we will know we have the mind of the Lord".  I did not remind the brother, who's sincerity I do not question, that  a few weeks earlier they were all of one mind that GG was a godly and spiritual man, in fact, he was "The Lord's Servant" and that he was the conduit of God's will into their lives.

Where the Bible tells them to do this is a mystry to me.  I find no mention of a method to "get the mind of the Lord".  I have been asking people for over 40 years where the Bible teach us to "feel led".  I am still waiting for an answer.

I could go on, and on.  Suffice it to say that this is a VERY mixed up group who really need to open up the windows and let some fresh intellectual and spiritual air into their heads.  Tim Geftakys, or anyone else, who is leading them in these paths is doing them harm.

Thomas Maddux

Interesting straw man here. You've set up a distorted example of our debate and then proceeded to use that to attack my arguments as illegitimate. Too bad there's a lot more than a 4 year age difference between us! In the end, Brent, you're always going to have a harder time proving your point merely because it's so extreme. In order to say that every LB was responsible for harming saints, you'll have to provide evidence on EVERY LB, both past and present, in the entire assembly history. So far, you can only state the obvious: that every LB knew GG, DG, BG, TG were sinners (without knowledge of adultery or wife-beating, however). You can only state that the LB's were in a system of false doctrine (can you point to any church elder in the world that is not in a system of false doctrine - only the Lord Jesus Christ had perfect doctrine). You really cannot differentiate between the LB's of the assembly with any other church leader, no matter what denomination. As I said, you're never going to be able to say that they ALL guilty.

I know that I'll always have an easier time showing my point. I'm a moderate. I don't dare say that ALL the LB's are guilty, but I don't say that they are ALL innocent. No, sir - that's ridiculous.



Brent, I don't feel you do either =)  I wouldn't recommend hiding behind Mark C's post, by the way - it didn't really make a lot of sense:


"He has to unlearn the falseness." LOL Unlearn..that is such an assembly phrase. I had to "unlearn" a lot of ideas I had too when I came into the assembly. Now we have to "unlearn" things again lol. Sorry, his was an emotional post. He completely misunderstood something I said too:

"To see those calling for clarity re. former leaders of the Assembly as being "evil and filthy" could be taking the Devil's side in the argument, and put one in danger of rejecting the knock of Jesus at our door."

Mark,
Brent is not just calling for clarity re. former leaders. He is calling them ALL guilty. In doing so, he's falsely accusing many innocent brothers - as stated before, he's calling brothers guilty whom he's never before met. I'm sure there are LB's out there whose name Brent wouldn't even know -  yet Brent is calling them guilty too. Falsely accusing people is "evil and filthy," Mark. Brent did that in the STL sister fiasco (although Brent repented, Lord bless him.) So you see, it's all a matter of perspective. I do feel those who wrongly accuse innocent brothers are taking the devil's side of the argument, sir.

Lord bless.

- Matt

New Topic, but same old misrepresentation.  Here's Matt's:


Again, this is my last word on this thread, on this very tedious line of thinking.  Matt, you are not bullet proof.

hmmm....same topic, Brent's old inconsistencies:

Which is it, Brent? Are they ALL guilty as you've "guaranteed":


or not?

Matt, did you notice that a portion of Brent's post was highlighted in yellow?  I was able to discern that he has always allowed for degrees of guilt.  How can you possibly argue with him on this matter?

Do you have some emotional attachment to a leading brother?  Did you live with one while you were in the Assembly?

 Indeed, you have definitely made your point, and it is quite clear for all to see.


I read that thread very carefully.  The way I remember the facts is that someone sent out false email/PM's saying that Paul Robinson was gay.  Luke Robinson, according to a person who claimed to have originated the false email, took these messages and spread them around, causing the family to rally round the falsely(?) accused brother.

Paul's family claimed that a blind man originated the false accusations.  Brent foolishly entered the fray with an attempt to initiate communication with Saint Louis Sister, and correctly began to defend the blind man, who was being falsely accused.

The situation resolved itself with apologies all around, especially from the people who brought the blind man's heretofore unknown name on the forum.  He never did or said any of the things he was accused of.  Brent apologized for something he "thought," not something he said.  I re-read the thread and could not see where he slandered anyone.

However, Matt, you called this blind man a liar more than once, and took the side of the people publishing a false report.  You have not apologized for this.

How can you possibly reconcile your position?

I will not make a habit of defending people who have differing views on this forum, but in this case I felt that I must, due to the overall silence in the face of a significant distortion of the truth.

Lurker

Matt,

The two statements that you have quoted are not as contradictory as they seem.
The key phrases are "which were squelched" and "left or were forced out because of it".
What this means is that the means of squelching was to get rid of leaders who cared enough to try to do something about the problems.

Do you mean how can I possibly argue against all leading brothers being guilty? That's very easy, all I need to do is point out that Brent isn't omniscient.


No, I never lived with a leading brother. I have not been in contact with a leading brother in a long time.


I will not apologize for calling him a liar. The only thing that Tony Edwards has been falsely accused of is calling Paul gay. He never said that. He did, however, send a slanderous email about the Robinson family as a whole. I know because he sent one to me. He has admitted that he lied in that email, and he has repented for it.

Regarding "what he was accused of." I contacted Mr. Edwards and asked if I could post his email on this BB so that we could see that he isn't innocent. He has asked me not to do that, and they are working the problem out in St. Louis. It's no longer an issue on the bb.

That was a nice try, Lurker, but you see what happens when someone who doesn't know anything about the assembly first-hand tries to get involved? =)


Just did.


Oh, don't you worry. Brent has enough supporters and people defending him. As for distorting the truth, I'm afraid you were guilty of that thanks to your assumptions surrounding the Tony Edwards case. Next time, be a little more careful! Lord bless.

- Matt

Matt,

As much as I have tried to stay out of the fray in these discussions, and I have had private communications with you that have remained civil, I can no longer remain quiet.

I have said this before, but it bears repeating.  When the Enroth book, "Churches That Abuse" came out, I had been in the assembly for only a few years (the same amount as you had been when the assemblies dissolved.)  I defended this system staunchly.  I defended the leadership in my assembly (who I have since 15 years later come to truly see in the light of day.)  

Since you never really were discipled by a truly "christian" group, I would like to suggest to you to take a break from the BB and the defense of this system and get some discipleship from a reputable person who could educate you regarding your theology in order to look at the assembly with clear vision.  

It is interesting to me that you are constantly fighting with men and women who have been in the assembly for decades.  These same men and women know personally hundreds of the people who are being referred to here and some were in leadership positions and know firsthand the doctrine and philosophy that was rampant in the assembly.  You were just a "baby" in the "family", so to speak.  As in families, it is the elders who really understand the history and the underpinnings of the family.  I would suggest you learn from your elders in matters regarding the assembly and step back and take stock.

I am not concerned that you return to the assembly.  There is no assembly to return to.  However, those who refuse to look realistically at where they have come from are apt to repeat it.  I would hate to have you find another organization like the assembly, only to discover as many of us have 15-20 years later what we have been discussing here.  I am entrusting you into the care of our wonderful Savior, as he is ultimately in control and will pray you will find Him in the midst of your search.

I am not trying to win an argument.  Only trying to get you to look at things from a different perspective.  Please take it with that in mind.

Your sister in Christ,

Kimberley

So I defended a liar?  ??? ???

(omniscience is not all it's cracked up to be)

Matt, I apologize to you.  I didn't realize that Tony was a liar, and so I will not continue in my dissappointment that an apology from you has not been forthcoming.  I want to confess to you that I have thought much less of your sincerity lately, since in my eyes it appeared that you were quite in the wrong with regard to Tony's exposure.  I didn't realize that he had repented of lying about the Robinson family.  No wonder he doesn't want his email read!  People who write emails, who don't want them to be publicly aired are liars, right? He is a liar!  If someone is a liar, and you truthfully point this out, you have nothing to apologize for.  Tony was never a leading brother, so telling lies is definitely NOT ok for him.  I think Lurker owes you an apology as well. My apologies, Matt.

Brent

Hi Matt! :)
   I don't get the idea that Brent is suggesting that all leading bros. in all Assemblies are guilty of all the same thing.  If he were that would not be "filthy" but mistaken.  I think you go too far in your attempts to judge Brent's motives.  I have been guilty of juding motives in the past with you and Luke, and I would entreat you to consider abandoning that kind of argumentation.
   As you mentioned, Brent apologized, and has always seemed to be quick to receive correction when he has made a mistake.  I really don't understand all your rage against Brent and the BB.
   I'm sorry for using an old Assembly trigger phrase, but even after 12 years gone I too can revert to some bad Assembly habits. ;)
   I was a former leading bro. in the Valley and was of the number of those who were forced out for daring to challenge the system.  No, I didn't preach hostile resistance to GG, nor did I want to leave.  My health was poor and I told the brothers I wanted to move closer to my work (30 mins. from the Valley).  They asked me, " are you asking us or telling us"?  My answer, " I feel the Lord wants me to do this."  After this they told me I had to step down as a leading bro. and could not speak last on Sun. morning.  I would no longer be in the afternoon preaching rotation, lead the prayer mtg., etc.  I was asked to sign a letter of resignation, which I was not willing to do.  The bros. began to shun me and when I did share a word they would cross their arms and glare at me.  The last time I spoke Mitch followed me as the 3rd speaker and contradicted the simple message I gave (nothing rebellious about my message; a simple devotional thought) and tried to make me look foolish and an enemy of God.  There are other things they did along the way as well to make it clear I was not wanted in their fellowship.  I left heart broken and totally devastated due to the treatment received by those I thought were my family, friends, and brethren.
  True, it is my experience, and not one that I can apply to all assemblies everywhere.  The Valley bros. received their instructions on how to "handle" me from GG and possibly there were bros. in other places that would have refused to go along with that.  Wherever GG held sway his abusive controlling methods would work there way into each local group.
   I think the point is not that all Assemblies and Leading bros. are equally culpable, rather that GG had at least some influence over all these groups, and it would be wise to learn just how much any particular Assembly/teacher was under the GG bewitchment.   This would take the "outside" instruction that Kimberley mentioned in her post.  I was astonished after first leaving to learn what the Bible actually taught re., the Gospel, what the Christian life was, and the proper excercise of authority in the church.
  The same leading bros. that forced me out 12 years ago, today have taken the attitude that the fall of the Valley Assembly was due to one bro. who wanted to know how they stood in light of GG.  It was this poor little sheep's questioning that brought down the work of God! (yeah -right!)
  These leading bros. do not see any problems with their past behavior, teaching or practices, nor will they even entertain the possibility that they could have erred.  None of the bros. have apologized for forcing me out.
  I guess it would be good to hear from some of these Leading bros. and to hear their side of the story.  Maybe they would tell us things we are totally unaware of and this would give us a chance to get things right with them.  I would be quick to leave my gift at the altar for any chance at reconciliation with any falsely slighted Assembly member/leader.
  Sadly Matt, you are their lone defender here.  A young bro. who only had a short time in the Assembly at a time when GG was losing his grip on "his ministry" and had to moderate some of his overt abuses.  Cult watchers had been alarmed for years from what they saw in the Assembly teaching/practices and the Assembly even made it into several best sellers on abusive churches.  It wouldn't hurt to review these books to get a bigger picture than just the local San Diego scene.
  Re. Jesus as being the only sound instructor:  This is just plain ridiculous.  Paul knew and preached the Gospel clearly and has given us his words that Christians believe were inspired by the Holy Spirit.  This Gospel is both simple and easily available for all who can understand language.  We are told to judge speakers/writers and judge if their teaching is true or false.  We are told that God has given us discernment through His word and by His Spirit.
  Teachers today are not inspired like Jesus and Paul, but understanding the grace of God in truth is right before us and our birthright as born again Christians.
   The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation, not some group.  The Gospel is to be defended and advanced, not some leaders of a ministry judged and found wanting.
               See you next weekend and God Bless,  Mark
 
   
   

Hi All

I have received a couple emails taking me to task for calling Tony a liar.  Well, I won't apologize, because Matt says he has repented of lying, and apparently Matt is in contact with people in St. Louis who are working it out.  So, I guess that makes Tony a repented liar.

I was apologizing for judging Matt, because it seemed to me that he was out of line for some of his words in that whole thread.  My bad.  I didn't realize that Tony was lying.  In his communication to me, which included some of what he said to others, he didn't say anything close to a lie.  I must not have read the lies he sent to Matt, and since Matt has confirmed that he actually lied, and repented of it, I am only apologizing to Matt.

This whole thing is so stupid I can hardly stand it any longer.  Now, I am wondering what will happen if we find out that Tony didn't lie, and that he isn't repenting of lying...then what?

Email is so strange; you can send it to one person, and then to another.  All the words are the same but the people who read it come to totally different conclusions about it!  For example, the writer says, "I was dissappointed that so and so left without an explanation, they only left a short note."

One person reads it to mean the author was dissappointed, and the other reads that the author was lying through his teeth!  The person didn't leave without an explanation, they left a 4 sentence long note and explained to people that they didn't want to be contacted!  The author is obviously a liar in this case, because a note is an explanation.  How stupid can they get?

Seriously, I think someone is going crazy here.  I read things, and they seem so straightforward.  Then I hear that they are lies!  How can anyone get the truth?

I hope I am not judged for destroying George's ministry... :-\

Someone gave me this promise when I got saved 20+ years ago:
...those who honor Me I will honor... 1 Sam 2:30
And my husband and I have discovered this to be true, because the Lord keeps His Word.

The whole verse:
1Sam 2:30 "Therefore the Lord God of Israel declares, 'I did indeed say that your house and the house of your father should walk before Me forever'; but now the Lord declares, 'Far be it from Me-- for those who honor Me I will honor, and those who despise Me will be lightly esteemed.


Those LBs who have honored the Lord will GUARANTEED receive honor from the Lord.
Those LBs who 'despise' Him will GUARANTEED be lightly esteemed by Him.

I do not feel I have to defend them, nor do I feel that I have to shame them with 'put down humor'.

This is not to say that others of you should or shouldn't; it's just not 'my cup of tea'.  We each have our contribution in the whole.  I thought I might change my user name to Puddleglum.

Love and God bless,
M

I'm honored to have 3 people vying for my attention. I will do my best to address all of you here:

Kim Tobin,
Thank you for your post, ma'am. It reminds me about that verse - a gentle answer dispels much wrath. I know that you are genuinely concerned for my spiritual condition, and for that I'm grateful. I noticed that you compared yourself to me when you mentioned that you defended the assembly system from Enroth's book when you had been in the assembly as long as I had. I'm not defending the assembly system as whole, nor am I saying that GG or DG are qualified to lead. I think they need to repent. I'm not saying that all LB's are innocent of harming the saints. My only arguments are that there are many many Goldy good things that came from the assembly. There were also many Godly LB's that are not guilty as Brent Tr0ckman has asserted (well, sometimes he asserts they all are, sometimes he asserts that those who left the assembly a long time ago aren't - who knows, depends on the day I guess).

You also state that I've never been discipled by a "christian" group. I have only been discipled by the assembly, that is true, but I have only been discipled by a Christian group - the assembly. I thank you though for your concern and for your moderate tone. Mr. Tr0ckman and I could learn a little something from you, ma'am.

Brent:
Excuse me? I'm totally confused. Tony Edwards emailed me out of the blue.

"Email is so strange; you can send it to one person, and then to another.  All the words are the same but the people who read it come to totally different conclusions about it!" - Brent Tr0ckman

 You said that he said very gracious, kind things about the leadership in St. Louis. If that's the case, then we received completely different emails. Verne Carty, not I, chose to make part of this email public knowledge on the BB. Having received this email myself, I knew that it was not entirely true, and had to testify that Tony Edwards was lying. The matter was already laid to rest when Lurker decided to criticize me for calling Tony a liar. Your sarcastic "apologies" mean nothing:

"People who write emails, who don't want them to be publicly aired are liars, right?"

No, Brent, I'm not saying that. I didn't want you publically posting my emails and I don't feel I'm a liar. That's not the reason I said Tony Edwards lied. I said that Tony Edwards lied because he said he lied. And for the record, Brent, I didn't just randomly email someone in St. Louis (Tony) and try to get a bunch of gossip about what's going on in an assembly in which I don't know anyone personally. Tony chose to email me these things and so it became my business what was going on in STL.

MarkC and Kim,
You both have mentioned that I'm the "lone defender" of the LB's on here. That's just the point. People before me have come on here to defend the LB's and one by one they were chased off. We are horribly outnumbered. This website and bb was created for a specific group - a group that is hostile to the assembly and to the LB's. Al Hartman even asserts that this bb is a "field station" for "wounded pilgrims." Don't ask me where the doctors are though... Anyway, this site was created for your viewpoint, not mine, and that is the reason that I'm the "lone defender." Anyone who dares to say anything contrary to B. Tr0ckman will have to face a consierable opposition.. let's see..on this thread..I've faced. Verne, Kim, Lurker, Mark C, Tom Maddux, Stephen Fortesque....
In some ways, I think it's unnecessary for the sidekicks. They might as well just post "yeah what he said" after Brent posts.

Lord Bless.

- Matt

Matt,

Please pay attention to details: you misspelled my name.

     Mark Campbell brings up an interesting thought that has been on my mind for some time now:

 

     Why haven't we heard from any of the elders, workers or LBs who stayed to the very end?  Former leaders & workers who stepped down or were "fired" are plentiful enough, but those who remained in "the work" are not posting.  Surely everyone who was there at the end must be aware of the website & BB by now.  Are all those leaders who were faithful to the Lord standing silent while one young brother (who doesn't know most of them or their histories) champion their cause?


     Email is the written word, no different in nature from a handwritten letter or a printed article or book:  People read (into it) what they want to believe is there, and people write what they want others to believe.
     Consider how many denominations, sects and cults can PROVE beyond a shadow of (their) doubt that their beliefs are true, ALL USING THE SAME SCRIPTURES.
     The ONLY safe way to learn the word of God is to study in humility, asking God's guidance, protection and enlightenment, and even then it takes time and great patience.  There is no reason to approach any other writing any differently, including email.  Only the Lord can sift the truth from the chaff.  Only he can unclutter our minds of all the untruths that have entered.  But we must desire this intensely, and we must ask.
     Writing is no different:  If you have an axe to grind, you will write to influence your readers to accept your views.  But if we are willing to set self-interests aside for the greater glory of God, we can ask him to use us to shed abroad his truths for the benefit of all who will read our words.  Dare we suppose that the prophets and apostles wrote with a mindset to advance their own views and not those of God?  Should we be less devoted to him than they?


     Finally, look up the scriptures that use the words debate, argue, dispute, etc., and their derivatives.  Do this humbly, asking God to teach you, not with a preconceived goal in mind.  You don't need my conclusions about the subject.  We all need God's perspective.

al Hartman

Hi Matt!
   I think that you are courageous in your attempts to defend aspects of the Assembly.  Indeed, there has not been one poster here to rise in agreement with you.   This could be a sign of good independent thinking, a desire to be a contrarian, or just one who just likes a good argument.
  The majority is not always right (usually isn't) and just going along with them is a lesson we should have learned from our Assembly days as a bad course to follow.
   Dismissing arguments as being part of a conspiracy can circumnavigate discussion of the issues.  I think the agreement you find from opponents on this topic comes from the experiences of those posting.  In some cases it also comes from a considerable amount of study re. the true nature of Christian life vs. the abberant and dangerous deceptions in the world.
   When we discuss our relationship with the Lord it is wise not to get locked into a competitive mode of verbal combat, as winning a point is not as important as arriving at the truth.
   I shared a part of my own story to help you see that I did not arrive at my thinking via Brent's direction, but from my own life and study.  I wrote a paper way back in 1990 outlining my concerns re. the Assembly, before this BB or having ever met Brent.
  I too care for your spiritual well being and it is a healthy thing to respectfully consider entreaty from those who have a testimony of careful study of the matters we are discussing.  Again, defense of a group at the expense of understanding the Gospel of grace is a bad trade.
                                         God Bless,  Mark

Friends,

I remember, way back when this board first started-- here we were--refugees, so-to-speak, from a trying experience that we had in common.  This board was a place where we could get answers and talk with one another.  We could find people that we hadn't heard from in years.  Broken relationships were restored and new friends made.  It was a place where we could finally obtain resolution to things we just had to wonder about before. It was a place for healing and for truth, a place where we could once again find the joy in being saved, the joy of knowing Jesus, the joy and relief to know that we do not obtain full salvation by devout effort!  It was a place where we could begin to rebuild and live normal and good lives once again. It was a place for healing and for truth.

Why is it now that we spend so much time on petty arguments?  I wonder why you even respond to Matt or people like him.  Has he demonstrated much understanding in regards to the assembly?  Has he allowed himself to see the truth, or rather is he intent only on generating strife and keeping the hostile argument alive?  Look at his posts, esp. his first twenty or so and you'll see that he is a confused young man who needs help, but it will not come by public confrontation on the board.

There is so much to look forward to, and I feel like I'm just once again barely starting to scratch the surface of the wonders of God's love and what wisdom there is to find in the Bible.  I still have so many questions to ask.  I'm sure we all do, and I have found some good answers here.  Let's look upward and focus on these things and not on trival matters.  How about we move forward and go exploring.  It will be an adventure.

Arthur


Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Phil 4:8

Leave the presence of a fool, for there you do not meet words of knowledge.  Prov. 14:7
It is an honor for a man to keep aloof from strife; but every fool will be quarreling. Prov 20:3
Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, for he will despise the wisdom of your words. Prov 23:9

Thanks Arthur, I needed to hear that.

Brent

Matt:  I was trying to compare myself with you yes, but not in the way that you think.  I guess I didn't go far enough to show you the comparison.  I included in my description that I defended the head leading brother in my assembly staunchly as well.  This same man (now that I know him MUCH better) who I staunchly defended and thought he was a "godly" man (because that is the facade they put forth) has now been shown to me to be what he truly is.  1)  A false teacher; 2) A man who is unwilling to submit to the governmental authorities in his business dealings; and 3) a man who extends little grace or mercy to his flock.  It is only through years of dealing with the man that I have come to know his true character not that which he attempts to put forth.  I don't believe that you can after only three years of involvement have a real understanding of how the assembly functions (i.e. what the leading brothers were taught to preach and how to govern in the church, etc.)  Thus, you are defending the system of things by your defense of certain individuals and you aren't even aware of it.  This due to the fact that you look at these men and women as they present themselves to you, not realizing their support of a corrupt system of things (i.e. heretical teachings, controlling lives of others, etc.)  If you are defending them.....you are defending the assembly system of things.  It is only those who have clearly repented from their association with the assembly that can clearly be defended.  (And I think that is the point Brent is trying to make with you.  The "All" Brent I think is referring to is those LB's who refuse to repent and say that there was nothing wrong with the assembly.  Those who are the exception and thus fall into the category of "separate from the 'All'" are those LB's who took a stand against the assembly and it's corrupt system.)  Do you see the difference?


Please consider that the assembly was not a "christian group".  Again, I was trying in my post to ask that you receive from those who have been involved far longer than you and have since gone out to the mainstream evengelical community and learned one thing:  THE ASSEMBLY WAS A CULT - NOT A CHRISTIAN GROUP.  I would not suggest to a new believer who had just received Jesus as their savior to go the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Mormon church to be discipled.  In the same way the assembly is very similar to these groups.  Do some research.  Read some books on the subject.  It is very enlightening - not to mention massively liberating in your walk with Christ.  

And the thanks for the "moderate tone" all go to my wonderful Savior-Jesus.  Anyone who knows me will attest to "moderate tone" not defining me.  But since I have left the assembly, He is doing an incredible work of transformation in my life.  One that could not take place in the assembly under it's system of things.  Praise be to HIM.  This is the testimony of a life transformed by the liberating gospel of GRACE - not works.


We have not chased anyone off Matt.  They left of their own accord.  If they are uncomfortable with the dialogue where we were presenting our viewpoints (something not allowed in the assembly) perhaps they should question what is making them uncomfortable.  The reason most of us former assembly members are on this site is to reach out to those who are hurting or those who have been misled by the assembly and don't understand how dangerously they have been influenced by the assembly (I put you in that category).  Unfortunately, we are human and we don't always communicate in the most loving, effective way possible.  I hope others are learning, even through involvement on this BB, to communicate with these ones with grace, compassion and love.  Strangely, I believe those were attributes that were greatly lacking in relationships in the assembly.

I look forward to future correspondence with you that might open your mind to looking at things differently.

Kimberley  :)

Arthur,
I'm afraid I can't take this seriously. You didn't say anything publically to Brent or Verne Carty (aka Brent Jr.) when they mercilessly abused the Robinson boys, Affirming, the Teater boys, myself, etc. I'm afraid that the double standards you have prevent you from looking at this from a fair perspective. It's that blindness  you have to Brent and Verne's viciousness that is so similar to the blindness that people had to GG. Look at Brent and Verne's posts. Do these look like men in their 40's or haughty teenagers? What an example for the younger brethren! On the other hand, you're quick to defend Brent in the same way that people were quick to defend GG. Brent has become your new Godhead. A lot of people have warned on this board that Brent was becoming your God - teaters, Robinsons, me, etc. But you will be sorely disappointed if you trust in Brent - and that is the biggest understatement of the year!


Your words, not mine. I was just stating fact - listing the opposition on this thread. Nice try, though, Verne.

MGov,
I thank you for taking a stand. These men (Arthur, Verne, Brent) are huge hypocrites. They act out the same thing they criticize. Namely, they abuse people verbally, try to stamp out opposition, rally around a man (brent), but then criticize the assembly for the same. What did Verne say once? The Lord reserves his most strident criticism on hypocrisy? Interesting.

I for one hope that Matt does not leave the BB.

At the same time, I would appreciate not being called "God," and being told that people are propping me up as they did GG, etc.

Talking about things, without stooping as low as our habit has been of late is what I prefer.

Brent

Kim, I don't know who you're talking about, so I will trust that you are right with regard to your LB. You must remember, however, that LB's are not one and the same. You said that your LB didn't submit to governmental authorities - I remember once a brother asked our LB if paying taxes instead of tithing was unBiblical because we were making the Government instead of God. The LB said that we were to submit to the government, and that if doing so meant we had to pay taxes, then we must pay taxes. I also know that my LB extended abundant mercy and grace to the saints in his care. He was so thoughtful, kind, soft spoken, patient, more willing to listen than to talk, never humiliated anyone, always had a word to cheer you up. I cannot place this man in the same category that you put your LB. You see, you assume that your experience is the same as everyone else's. I want you to know that I respect your position. I do not say that all LB's are innocent of hurting the flock - I can't say they are all innocent just because my LB was. But on the other hand, I don't say they are all responsible for hurting the flock - just like you can't say that because your LB hurt you. If he truly hurt you, I want you to know that I pray for your healing, and I don't mean to minimize that. I just don't want to see innocent LB's abused by disgruntled saints, most of whom they've never met.
 


I don't think that being associated with the assembly is something that an LB needs to repent of. No church has perfect doctrine, so must all leaders step down? No leader is sinless, are they thus disqualifed? You see, you will never find a church that has perfect doctrine, and you will never find a leader who is without sin. You will never find a church without corruption. The Lord didn't make us to be perfect. So we cannot ask the LB's as a whole to repent for their assembly involvement because that would be asking them to repent for not being perfect.



This brings us back to the same point that I had with brent. If the assembly wasn't a Christian church, then the LB's are not accountable because they weren't christian leaders. It soon becomes evident that people who are hostile to the assembly will twist their stand around in any way possible to hurt the LB's. You can say it was a Christian church and then blast the LB's for "allowing" GG to be a sinner. Or you can say it was a cult, and not a Christian church, in which case the LB's are not responsible for anything.


Kim,
I just want to reiterate that I thank you for you concern for my spiritual condition. I know that it's sincere. I know that you are showing me what God has shown you, and I appreciate that. I know that you were hurt, and I never want to minimize that or belittle it - in fact I pray for you. But you must trust that God speaks to me too. You are right that I know very little about other churches aside from the assembly. But I'm saved and I have been taught the importance of getting into the Word every morning to see what the Bible says for itself (something taught in the assembly!!!). I don't agree with everything about the assembly, again no church has perfect doctrine. But I do believe that God has put it on my heart to defend the vast majority of LB's from wrongful accusations. Thanks for your understanding.
Lord bless.



Brent, I'm glad that you said "our habit." I don't think anybody called you God, they said that you think of yourself as God. When I said the "GG" comment, what I meant is that people are blind to your abusive behavior, but are quick to notice your opposition's sin. I know that I have not always glorified the Lord in my conversations with you. I know that I have hit below the belt (well, haven't we all at sometime?) Forgive me for that, although I'm not so foolish as to promise that it won't happen again. I don't trust you , Brent, not that it matters to you if I do. But you are my brother-in-JC, and so I must believe the best about you. Lord bless.
- Matt

Matt,

A general principle about accountability of leaders.
All leaders are accountable, Christian and non-Christian.
As a President, or a church leader, or a teacher, or a parent or... each is accountable, because God is over all.

I understand your line of reasoning, but since they were in a place of leadership they are accountable (for good and for bad).

Love and God bless,
M

And Jesus said, For judgement I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.  And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?  Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.  John 9:39-41

Even if a "leading brother" is not a genuine leading brother, he is still held accountable if he claims to be one.

---

Perhaps some of the confusion is that you believe that there is very little that leaders are supposed to do.  Others believe that certain things the leaders were supposed to do didn't get done, that they were AWOL from their job, that even though details aren't known as to why these things didn't get done, it was the leader's job to see that they were done by any means necessary.  This is most people's definition of leadership.

I can see why you would believe that there wasn't much that the leaders were supposed to do, since a number of the people chosen by GG to lead were not capable of doing more.  They were too young and inexperienced in life to know how to do more.  It was not right for GG to have put them in such a position.

---

Sorry, Mr.Fortesque, but the passage you have talked about is more of a rebuke to the pharisees for their self-righteous attitudes. The pharisees in that passage assert that they can see and thus can pass judgment. But Jesus says that HE was sent into the World for judgement  Jesus is pointing out that they are still sinners - as all men are. Nobody is saying that the LB's aren't sinners. Jesus is asserting to the pharisees that they are guilty of sin - and we all are. Just as we are all pharisaical. It doesn't mention anything about non-Christian leaders being responsible for a Christian flock.

In my defense of the LB's, I'm generally referring to Brent's favorite passage in 1 Timothy 5 about rebuking elders if 2 or 3 witnesses are present. That passage is clearly talking about rebuking elders of a Christian church. If the assembly wasn't a Christian church, then that passage can't be applied to the LB's because they aren't elders of a Christian church. You can't have it both ways: we were either in a cult, not a church, and thus the LB's are only as guilty as we are OR we were in a christian church and we have yet to hear 2 or 3 witnesses come forward for a specific offense against every leading brother in the entire assembly history. Until we do, we can't say that ALL leading brothers are responsible for hurting the flock.

By the way, your last paragraph was entirely assumption. I don't think the LB's weren't supposed to do anything. I think they were supposed to serve - and did they ever. Giving their lives and opening up their homes to the saints - you'd be hard pressed to find such dedication at most churches on such a personal level. They (the LB's, not the workers) weren't even paid to do this, and they continued working full time and raising families. I'm sorry, sir, but you are mistaken if you think they did nothing. You have a Biblical obligation to esteem and honor the LB's who served you (see my signature line). Nice try, though, sir.

- Matt

I think what you are saying is:

If the assemblies were not a Christian church, but a cult, then should we still apply Biblical principles when rebuking/correcting the LBs/elders?

If the assemblies were Christian and not a cult, then Biblical principles must be applied to each LB individually, and not collectively.  (In this case Brent has already said that not ALL LBs are guilty).

Correct me if I am wrong.

M

Yes, we should apply biblical principles, especially if dealing with a cult.  There are many passages that tell us how to relate to false teachers, and false brethren, and we should apply them!

Was every person in the Geftakys group a false brother?  In no way!  Was every leader a false brother?  No sir--that's ridiculous ;)

Was the group a cult?  I think that they have cultic practices, and a cultic culture, so a strong case can be made that they are a cult.  On the other hand, people did actually get saved there, and the vast majority of the members are true Christian brethren.

My conclusion?  It's a moot point.  If someone wants to call it a church, that's fine with me.  I am not offended at all by people who call it a cult either.  It's the teaching and practice that is the problem.  People taught and practiced, so we must also identify those who promoted the false system, in order to contend for the faith!

So, when dealing with George Geftakys, and those who are of his ilk, we should apply the Bible.

Here's a good one:  3John 9  I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us.  10  Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting [them] out of the church.  11  Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. He who does good is of God, but he who does evil has not seen God.

Here's another:  2John 7  For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ [as] coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.  8  Look to yourselves, that we do not lose those things we worked for, but [that] we may receive a full reward.  9  Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.  10  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him;  11  for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.  (note, I am not saying that George taught that Jesus didn't come in the flesh, but he and David hinted at it a few times.  I share this only as an example of the many verses pertaining to false brethren)

1John 4:1  Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.  2  By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,  3  and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the [spirit] of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.  In this one, we are to test the spirits, in order to determine what is false.  It is implied that the false should be identified, pointed out, and avoided.

You all know what my favorite verse is regarding discipline of REAL christian leaders.

Brent

Good post.  This answers the question very well.  Thank you, Brent.

No, you said it wrong. No, sir - that's ridiculous.


Surely, you jest. Brent wouldn't be offended if someone called the assembly a cult? I'm eating my hat right now.


What does this verse have to do with disciplining LB's? It says do not imitate evil. Are you saying that the LB's were evil?  I know what you mean! They selfishlessly opened up their homes to prayer meetings and Bible Studies. They callously talked on the phone or visited the saints in their times of need. They viciously prepared Sunday messages and coordinated outreaches. They cruelly denied payment of any kind for their leadership. Then they had the gall to try to work full time and raise a family of their own. Thank goodness the abuse is over!


Neither of these verses discuss leaders of a non-Christian body for being responsible for the flock. Rather, it puts the responsibility on the saints to avoid non-Christian leaders.


Don't we ever. So, what is it? It's not a moot point, Brent, if you're attempting to wreak havoc in the lives of the LB's who served us. Which is it? We were in a cult and therefore the elders were not leaders of a Christian church and are not accountable for anything OR we were in a Christian church and we are still awaiting 2 or 3 witnesses to come forward for a specific offense against every Lb in the entire history of the assembly - from China to Providence, RI. From Calgary, Canada to San Diego, CA. From 1971? to June 6, 2003.

Also, you can't say that you believe that not all LB's are guilty. You said quite clearly that the LB's are guilty because they promoted GG, were appointed by GG, had direct contact with GG or his workers every week. Then you said that the LB's who left or were forced out before GG's ex-communication were not guilty. Were the LB's who left earlier not appointed by GG? Did they never promote him? Were these LB's not in contact with GG every week? It's just an inconsistency, Brent. You have to stop twisting what you're saying around to inflict the most damage on the LB's and their families.

I'm not saying those LB's that left before GG's ex-comm are guilty. I'm saying that they are just as deserving as honor as the rest of the LB's. They're not guilty for promoting a sinner - every leader is a sinner. They're not anymore guilty than any other church leader for there being some false doctrine - every church has false doctrine. They're not guilty because they didn't know GG and DG were corrupt and immoral - they barely saw the man but a few times a year and his sin wasn't the topic of seminars and those "weekly" phone calls. These men having nothing to repent for in terms of their assembly involvement.

We, on the other hand, have a Biblical obligation to esteem and honor these men. Do what the Bible says, not what Brent says.

Lord bless.

- Matt

Matt,
You  know, sometimes you remind me of a spoiled brat. (Mind you- I did not call YOU a spoiled brat, just for the record, in case you were planning to say I did).  Why don't you just make a meaningful contribution to the website?  You yourself is one complaining that the BB is vile and evil-why don't you help to make it better?  Attacking Brent has gotten real old.  The world doesn't revelove around you and you're negativity.  Give it up, be a grown-up, and let us see some of that intellect that I'm SURE is within you (hint, hint: that was a COMPLIMENT!!) ;D

Hi Matt

This is a good question.  My line of reasoning on this was to look at the passage in the context of the church, and its leader, Diotrophes.  Diotrophes loved to be number one in "his" church.  He had the habit of prating against Paul, with malicious words, and he didn't receive other Christians in his church, but instead had the nasty habit of excommunicating them!

Paul said that he was going to remember Diotrophes' deeds, in other words, publicly expose his evil behavior.

I chose this passage, because it is an example of a Christian church, lead by an evil person!  This is a passage that applies to dealing with leaders of a church, which was the topic.  In other words, this passage applies to LB's,  if we grant that the Assemblies of George Geftakys are a legitimate Christian church, with an evil leader(s).  Other passages apply in other situations, as outlined.  

That's why I chose it.  I also wrote some other words in that post that explained my position further.

Brent

hmmm...as I recall, the assembly DID try to receive other Christians in its church. Also, I don't know what LB's you're talking about  but what LB's had a "habit of prating against Paul with malicious words" or any other Godly man? Come on, sir - that's ridiculous.


He sure did! Good thing the vast majority of LB's don't fit Diotrophes' description, however.


Ok. So the assembly was/is a Christian church. I'm glad that this is established. So, now the problem is proving that the LB's were "evil." That was my question - the one you called a "Good question." It remains unanswered. How were the LB's evil (and I'm talking as a whole, not individual cases)? Also, the example you gave was of a Christian church. My point was, if the assembly was a cult and not a church, then you can't use a passage about rebuking leaders of a Christian church.

The point still has not been addressed:

1. We were a cult, not a church, and the LB's were never elders of a christian church (and thus did not have the Biblical responsibility that elders of a Christian church have. that means, it doesn't matter how many witnesses come forward, they were not elders and we are not required to publically rebuke them...)

2. We were in a church, not a cult, and the LB's are responsible. We know that the vast majority of LBs served the saints well and fulfilled their responsibilities many times over. We also know that the vast majority of LB's were not evil men. And we also know that 2 or 3 witnesses have not come forward against every LB in the assembly history for a specific offense. Those leaders who have had witnesses come forward (mainly GG and DG) have already been publically rebuked.

Eulaha,
You're so sweet to me and the other younger brethren! Thanks so much for the "compliment".

XOXOXOXOXO Love you,
Matt

Matt, I shall do my best to answer your questions again.

First of all, recall the post I did a while back, where I highlighted a bunch of stuff in yellow.  I was attempting to communicate, with that post, that not all the LB's were evil.  In a recent post, I asked the rhetorical question:  "Were all the leaders false brethren?"  I answered that one "No, sir, that's ridiculous."

So, you are asking me speak of the LB's as a whole, in which case we must allow for varying degrees of guilt, as outlined in my "yellow" post.

If the Assembly was a church, then it is quite clear that we are to hold fast to sound doctrine, and rebuke those who do not.  Elders are to be rebuked in the presence of 2 or 3 witnesses.  With regard to adultery, there were more than 2 or 3 against George.  With regard to false doctrine, taught in EVERY ASSEMBLY, there are hundreds of witnesses, dozens of them have written publicly about it.

Have you read the material on GA.com yet?  The last time we had this discussion, you had not, but you will find your 2 or 3 witnesses there.  Matt, you must remember that there are several LB's who post regularly on this BB.  They readlily admit to false teaching, among other things.

In the case where we conclude that the Assembly was a cult, masquerading as a christian church, we are to expose it, resist it, and warn people about it.  The verses that come to mind are many.  The entire epistle to the Galatians fits this bill, in one sense.  The many conflicts with the Gnostics also does.  The Bible uses the term false apostle for a reason.

In the book of Revelation, God tells his people to come out of Babylon the Great.  Babylon is hardly a legitimate church, but yet God called HIS OWN people out of her.  The fact that Christians were in the Assembly does not mean the Assembly system was legitimate.  Certainly the leader and founder of the ASsembly was in no way legitimate.

Were there sincere people among the leaders?  ABSOLUTELY!  Mark Campbell is but one of many.

Were these sincere people deceived?  MOST DEFINITELY!

Are/were some of the leaders corrupt?  YOU BETCHA!

It is up to each of us to rightly divide God's word, which is what we have been doing for the last few days, much to our delight.  I invite you to join us, and I answer your questions again, as a gesture of goodwill.

Brent

Hi Everyone! :)
  I'm happy to be back from the hot and dusty streets of Bakersfield and to conversation on our beloved BB :).
   I notice the word "cult" has come up more than a few times on this thread and I thought I might have some helpful thoughts on the definition of the word, and it's possible application to the Assembly.
  The word "cult" is not really a Biblical word.  This word has a secular understanding and an evangelical Christian use as well; the 2 senses being different.
   On previous BB's re. cults/abusive/dangerous groups that I have been on arguments raged back and forth concerning the meaning of this label, as no group wanted to be associated with the likes of Jim Jones or the Branch Davidians.
 Christian Scholars use the word "cult" in it's classic use as describing a particular system of worship, and this has no negative connotations.
  Evangelical Christians describe a cult as something negative, and this negativity has to do with the areas of both doctrine and practice.
   The secular use of the word "cult" has to do with only the sociological aspects of the group (the world could care less about the orthodoxy of the teaching of a group).  The world also reserves the use of the word "cult" in the most extreme sense of it's abusive and controlling application.
   The sociolological aspects have to do with the practices of the group.  Enroth, in his book "Churches that Abuse" details 10 criteria that can be used to decide whether a group's practices are cultish in the "practical sense" of the word.  Since Enroth is a Christian his study of the practices are often more subtle and less dramatic than a secular study would be.  (I would recommend again the reading of the book, "The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse" as this book was written about just your normal evangelical church on the corner and not about cults.)
   The NT warns of false teaching and false practices and the need to constantly pay attention to these issues in the church.  There is no need to detail the obvious again here, as I believe there was always one central key to the Assembly problems and that was a lack of entreatability (pride).
   The defensive reactions of GG and his followers were what kept the Lord from reaching the hearts and minds of the members.  However we label this attitude of resistance it was what led to all the other abusive practices of GG and his loyal followers.
  The suggestion that there were those who believed they were loyally committed to the Lord in their defense of GG and his ministry is undoubtedly true; sincere, but sincerely wrong.  One can have a zeal that is not according to knowledge, and the need is not to defend the zeal of the deceived, but the attitude of the deceived to receive correction in this situation.
  To try and justify individual leaders of individual Assemblies, or of specific Assemblies, is exactly the opposite of what our response to the Lord should be.  To ask the Lord to help us examine what we believed and practiced in the Assemblies of GG is not an "attack" but an invitation to restoration and renewal.  To listen to those desiring dialogue re. these issues is not to face torment, but the wonderful blessing of God's healing grace! :)
                           God Bless,  Mark  
   

Again?!?! Brent, you haven't answered it once! You gave a passage about an evil leader (Diotrophes) and used this as evidence that we should rebuke the LB's - but you didn't tell us why the LB's are evil. Surely some were - but the vast majority? No, sir - that's ridiculous.


That's true. You said the LB's who were forced out of the assembly or who left the assembly on their own were NOT evil. I pointed out your inconsistency because you said that the LB's were all guilty for having been appointed by GG and for having promoted him, having had weekly contact with him, etc. However, the LB's who were forced out or left earlier (before GG's excommunication) still had been appointed by GG, still promoted him at some point or another, and still had weekly contact. We can't say that they are not guilty just because you admire them for leaving. I, however, say they are not guilty for another reason. These men were Christian men who served the saints. If there was false doctrine (and there was because every church has some false doctrine), then they are no more guilty of it than any other church leader of any other denomination.


Sorry, leaving the assembly earlier than the other LB's doesn't make them any more or less guilty.


Because a few leading brothers who have posted on this bb have felt the need to repent for their assembly involvement, doesn't mean that every LB is guilty. Every single church leader in the world needs to repent for there being false doctrine in their ministry - only Jesus Christ had perfect doctrine. I have read enough material on GA.com and we have already discussed how one-sided it is. You can find negative personal stories from any church and only post those things and make it look like the first church of Satan. I'm also aware of the bias of the people who are writing on that site, and so I have a duty to be wary of that site. Because you have put that site together, Brent, doesn't make it infallibe.


Babylon - reminds me of that David Gray song. Anyway, the Assembly was most definitely a church. It was a body of believers (and I'm sure the vast majority of LBs are Christians) who worshipped God together, reached out to unbelievers together, got into the Word together, and fellowshipped together. If there was false doctrine - that's irrelevant. If having false doctrine means that it wasn't a church - then there are no churches.


You didn't answer them again, though. I "invite you" to answer them. Brent, I also invite you to take a stand. Was it a Christian church or a cult. Pick one. When you do, don't use verses about rebuking elders of a Christian church if you say it's a cult. The Lord bless you, Brent.

- Matt

Matt, I have answered you, several times.  I think our sticking point is in the fact that you feel it is irrelevant if a church has false doctrine.

Here is my stand, which I have repeated in writing many times:

The Assembly was cultic in practice, but qualified as an abusive church due to the fact that it did preach the gospel.  Galatian heresy aside, The Assembly was an Abusive Church, that had cultic tendencies.

Brent

Dear Saints, all,

     Please consider the following amendments to to the boxed quotes.  There is much more at stake than you and me as individuals, and the scope of things to consider far exceeds the capacity for analysis by any one of us:

     Please don't think me petty for pointing this out:  The BB is a tool, used by people.  It is the people who post here-- every one of them-- who have made the "admirable attempt" of which Verne speaks.  i am not contradicting Verne's statement in any way, but hoping to direct its focus more sharply.  Please read on...


     Here Verne poses a question i hope to answer:  
The word "anyone" includes the ever-increasing body of saints registering on the BB, and the unknown number of "lurkers' who read the BB but do not post.  Many of the "newbies" hide their profiles for various reasons.  It is reasonable to presume that many from both these groups are still traumatized by their experiences and may, indeed, still regard their assembly as a place of sweetness and light.  Just because that is "beyond MY comprehension" does not place it beyond ALL comprehension.  We must try to see with the eyes of Christ, who is not impatient, trying to bear in mind that we often are, to our folly.  "In your patience possess ye your souls" Lk.21:19  (See also Heb.10:36;  Jas.1:3-4)
     In simple fact, i believed that the Fullerton was the epicenter of God's work on earth in the 20th century when i was unceremoniously ejected from it in 1980.   i believed that all the error was mine.  And, in spite of everything else in my life, i continued to believe that lie for the better part of 20 years!  In fact, it was the assembly website and this very BB that finally enabled me to break free from the stronghold of Geftakysism.  When i began to post here i was still in confusion.  Had my posts brought down upon me the rejection they might have, i could have retreated back into the shadows & still be there.
     But my experiences have not caused me to become emotionally invested in this issue, despite the opinion of any.  My appeal is based upon reason...

     "Mindless drivel" is AN opinion, not everyone's.  "Painfully obvious" is elitist:  what is obvious to you may be an obliteration to me, and vice versa.  "Irredeemably stupid" is patently absurd:  no one is irredeemably stupid.  Some just require more effort and patience than others.  "Profitability," then, is relative.


     Here is the crux of the matter:  What alternatives can "spiritual maturity" provide, with which we may occupy ourselves toward the edification of God's people?
     For starters, we must demonstrate a spirit of tolerance, so as not to frighten away the injured and the young by the use of severity.  Anyone should feel welcome to post their concerns and questions.  We may say, "There are no stupid questions," but if we then treat the questioner as a stupid person, what message are we really sending?
     But suppose someone begins to take up time and space with concerns that are not of general interest to most who use the BB?  Why, that is the reason we have the capacity to use email or private messaging.  There is absolutely no need, EVER, to take up BB space unnecessarily or with things in poor taste.  The question is, of course, whether the shepherds are committed enough to go the extra mile, or will we just adapt a "My way or the highway" attitude toward all with whom we choose not to associate?
     Verne's closing sums it all up:  "For Christ's sake.    
In Christ,"

al Hartman

Hello Al

Lately you seem to be quite upset over the tone of the postings.  Starting with one from Brent, in which he expressed happiness that the level of conversation was improving, and was pleased that people were not getting attacked, and ending with my post, which was a mild rebuke to Matt, for his (to quote you, Al) "far more insulting and inflammatory post,"  you seem to be expressing that Christ is not being honored by the posts, especially by those who, "play games."  The names you attached to the game players were Brent and Matt.

What sort of things do you want said here?

Also, if we must show patience and tolerance to the young ones, what are we to show towards the "older?"  Shall we grade acceptableness of speech on a curve?  Shall we handicap those whom you consider, "older," and publicly rebuke them for hiding carefully crafted challenges among fair speech, while showing tolerance to outright abusive language?

Al, I think it would be helpful and enlightening if you would lay down some quidelines we can all follow, in order to edify God's people.

What sort of things should be avoided, and by whom?  If a person under 30 is posting, or if we perceive that person to be "injured," what standard of acceptable speech should we apply?  If a person should know better, like Brent or Verne, how much less tolerance should we extend towards them?

The reason I am asking, is because I was under the impression that people were able to post their thoughts here.  Pretty thoughts and ugly thoughts were both allowed.  However, now you have brought things to another level, and have declared that some things are "Insane," and are not honoring to Christ.  I certainly don't want to do anything that isn't honoring to Christ, and neither do you, or Matt, Verne, Brent, or the other regulars.

So, before we post again, please clarify for us what sort of guidelines to follow, in order that we don't share real thoughts that might not be correct.  


Until you clarify what sort of things are not "Insane," and the general direction of speech that is ok with you, I will not post again.

Lurker

 

     My previous post speaks for itself, but one must be willing to hear.  My remarks are applicable to whosoever will, but are specifically directed toward shepherds of the Lord's people.  In my opinion, one who would lead God's people would not wish to remain anonymous and hide his or her profile.


     Thank you.

al Hartman

Al,

Who are the shepherds you refer to?

Brent

The inexcusable in Brent Junior's eyes (Verne) is anyone who dares to question his leader, Brent. Actually, Verne, no one is irredeemably stupid until their earthly life is done. Only after you have passed on and you rejected Christ - only then are you irredeemably stupid. So no one on this bb is irredemably stupid since everyone here is still alive. Al is saved, obviously, so he's not going to be able to take up your invitation to preach in hell, so sorry.


Well, probably you. Both you (and possibly Lurker) have endeavored to lead God's people from the assembly - have exercised some spirtual authority over others - as when you called the saints in Fullerton "foolish" for wanting Tim G. to lead them. So, pretty sure he's talking about you and Lurker when he says "shepherds."

And Lurker,
You're not above reproach. Brent and I remained silent in the face of our admonition from Al. I can't speak for Brent, but I did out of acceptance and gratitude for his fairness and for his insight. I appreciate Mr. Hartman's posts and if you don't want to post here, Lurker, then...as one wiseman said..."Thank You" =)

My friends, I think we agree on the main things.

How I see it:
-- Al makes a good point.  There are people out there who are just coming out of the Geftakys snare.  They haven't confronted it yet and are maybe now checking out this site for answers.  They see all the argueing and just cringe because they came for answers and see fighting and confusion.  "Oh, there's no use in trying" they may think :(
May it not be so, friends!  Let's help them.  

-- Verne also made a good point.  There are people who come on this site who are not seeking help at all.  Their only purpose is to cause trouble.  Let's deal with them with tact, friends!

I think there are some things that we all can agree on.

This bulletin board is a community of sorts in that it is a place where people like you or me can go and talk about things.  A lot of you I consider to be my friends.  I'm happy to hang out with you and ponder the deeper things of life or just chit-chat.  

The uniqueness of this community is that it's mainly for former (and some still present, I guess) assembly-members.  We all went through a difficult time, wouldn't you agree?  There was some serious problems and spirtual abuse going on.  I don't think anyone desputes that seeing as how George Geftakys was excommunicated.  I know that I'm still trying to figure out what happened to me and what to make of it all.  Talking with you, my friends, has helped tremendously.

That's the point of this community, isn't it?  To help people?  I know that many of you are caring and genuinely want to see others be healed and recovered from the abuse and misdirection they received in the assembly.  It seems that we have a responsibility to
1. help people who genuinely are seeking help and
2. to stand for the truth and tactfully deflect the blows of those who are not seeking for help but to cause trouble.  


1.  Help others:  Al brings up a good point.  There are people out there who are just like we were not too long ago.  You remember how it was back then?  Everything was so confusing.  We were in deep, deep spiritual and mental pain.  But This board shed some light.  How about it be that and only that, huh?  I wouldn't feel too safe in a hospital that has gun-fights in the hall-way.


2.  Tactfully deal with rabble-rousers:  When they come and insult you, I think it would be best to ignore them, maybe delete their post, and they'll go away.  NOTE: This does NOT mean that we go about deleting posts or ignoring anyone who has an opposing opinion.  I am strictly referring to those who break the rules of their login agreement and personally attack others or are in some other way clearly disruptive.  

The following passage is a wonderful guideline for how to handle these types of situations.  

22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. II Tim 2:22-26

v22 - here we are--fleeing the youthful lust of pride that ensnared us in the assembly in the first place. And here we are learning about the grace and mercy and love of God again.

v23 - please note the word "avoid" because it creates strifes, don't we know.

v24 - we have no need to strive.  We know the truth.  We did not originate the truth.  We were once without it and lost in darkness, but God taught it to us.  Now we are in pleasant patures and at peace, and therefore we can have great patience with which to teach the truth to others.  We know how patient God was with us.  

v25,26  - we're hoping that people will see the light.  We're not hoping they'll be doomed to dwell in darkness, to lay in the horror and misery of satan's snare...right?  Do we wrestle with flesh and blood?  

In summation, We affirm the truth.  We do not explore or respond to their foolish and strife-causing remarks.  If they refuse to listen, so be it, but we hope they will come to the truth.  

We don't want to detract from the purpose we have here of helping others to heal and to know the truth of the mercy and grace found in Jesus.


Arthur

Dear Saints,
     i have answered Brent in a private message, but since he asked me publicly, i will also respond here:
     The shepherds are those who take the responsibility of leading.  They are the ones everyone else follows.
     The shepherds protect the flock, feed, water and herd the flock.  Above all, the shepherds love the sheep, and would lay down their lives for all or any one of them.
in Christ,
al Hartman
     

Dear Saints,
     It grieves me deeply to point out these excerpts from the recent posts by Verne Carty on this thread, but he has made it necessary:
    The following are terms used by Verne to describe certain of his brethren, the people of God, and their views:
    The above are all Verne's own words, lifted from their context only for the sake of brevity.  You can see them as written in his several most recent posts.
     i have nothing derogatory to say about Verne.  He is my brother in Christ, and i love him.  He also said:

al Hartman

 

Al,
I thank you for trying to stick up for me on the bb. I have to admit that it was kind of unsettling reading this - especially because I know that nobody will mention to Verne the user agreement to the bb (the one that I'm always reminded of). It was difficult to watch Verne and Brent verbally abuse L and P Robinson, the Teaters, and also affirming. It was astonishing to see a woman (affirming) treated that way by the bb, and I know first-hand what it's like now to be verbally degraded by somebody who thinks it's his oh what's the term Verne used..."sacred duty?" I can't imagine the Lord commisioned Verne and Brent to verbally degrade the younger brethren and a woman to the point that many of them had to leave - but who knows?

It does reek of GG'ism. If anyone dares to question Brent Tr0ckman, or his followers, then prepare for the worst.  What can I say? It's his bb, really. He's the administrator. He has every right to tell everyone who disagrees with him to get off. As long as he's gracious enough to let me post here, I will. I can't expect Brent to publically rebuke Verne - Brent has asserted that Verne is a man of class and "grace." If that's Brent's idea of Grace - give me the assembly anytime. People are so blind to Brent and Verne's indiscretion and sin (like they were to GGs), but quick to see the oppositions. If I do get kicked off one day, I would liken to those rare times when a letter was read at an assembly telling people not to fellowship with so and so..

I'm not saying that I'm innocent or that L and P or the Teaters were innocent. (I don't think affirming was that guilty of anything - she had some very good posts). But I have to laugh because Verne can't see the hyporcrisy of his statements. My "renegade name calling..." What was the quotation of yours that was so stunning, Verne? Christ reserved his most strident criticism for hypocrisy?

Verne, write me brother.

- Matt

I must confess that earlier today I noticed Verne's brash language and wondered why no one had called him to task on it, until Al did.

With Matt, I communicate via private communication.  I have been unsuccessful communicating via PMs with some others, hence a public post.

I am sad that some have decided that they will no longer post, because there was/is much to learn in investigating the Scriptures with regards to various issues.

Mark C, as global moderator, has encouraged us to be open in communicating, but careful with our language.

Anyway, each must decide for themselves what each will do.

Lord bless,
M

Ok people, wake up and smell the hypocrisy!  Al, Mgov--why do you support Matt?  Come to your senses.  
Shall I stand by and let you say things about Verne like that.  No.  The difference between Matt and Verne is (among other things), Verne stands for what is right, Matt does not.  Do you understand that?

Let's take a trip down memory lane, shall we.


The history of Matt's posts:


A fairly good beginning -- maybe this is advice to be heard.


Matt's first scuffle -- on his third post on the board


Bad show, Matt.


"apologize...for existing..."  And Matt said HE was unsettled for reading Verne's posts?


"castrating yourself" --  enough said.


Another display of immaturity.


No respect.


So...Matt you are saying that it's all Verne's fault that you said Verne should castrate himself.








And why hasn't this happened yet?

This is just a brief glimpse at Matt's character.  Need we show more?

People, stop being so foolish and make a proper judgement.

Upbringing or being in the assembly is no excuse to  deny the truth.  Everyone has the opportunity to humble themselves and listen to the truth.  Matt has clearly shown that he will not.  And yet you side with him?  More than that you criticize those who clearly state the truth?!?  Shame on you!

Arthur

oops..Arthur, you left our a portion of that PM threat of yours:

Quote from: Matt on June 09, 2003, 04:32:09 pm    
Al,
I thank you for trying to stick up for me on the bb. I have to admit that it was kind of unsettling reading this - especially because I know that nobody will mention to Verne the user agreement to the bb (the one that I'm always reminded of).
 

Matt, you are not one to talk.  Don't put on this show.  You have consistenly shown that you will not listen to the truth,  rather you malign those who are clearly stating it.  Cease and desist immediately!
Please remove this post, or I will post the following:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And yes, you did post the following. I'm sorry, I can't let you intimidate me or threaten me by erasing my last post to Al and Verne. Isn't that strange - the anti-assemblyites claim that the assembly worked by intimidation. Anyway, Verne needed to hear these things, and he has. I regret saying those things, as I have said times before, but I do believe I rose above that. The most recent quote in your list was from a month and a half ago. To be honest, I had a good laugh reading through them again.

I guess what is really "hypocritical" is the way you treated me with this post. It's the same kind of treatment that you complained about on the GA site while you lived in DG's house. Yes, I read that testimony. How can anyone ever think of you as a victim now when you are doing the same kind of things to others? What this site has confirmed to me is that the factors of abuse that may have been present in the assembly are also present in the people who despise the assembly system. Therefore, it was the people in the assembly - not the system that promoted any kind of abuse.

Your arrogance is also overwhelming. You claim that everything Brent said, Verne said, you said is the truth?! LOL. And I'm stupid for denying that....oh my...to think you had the gall to say *I* need to humble myself. The truth is what you want it  to be on this site I guess. Anyone who disagrees with you is a liar. I'm sorry that you're feeling that way. Maybe one day you will stop following a man (Brent or Verne) and follow the Lord. Take care.

- Matt

I am re-engaging in this discussion after realizing that not all of what I see is pointless argument.  After reading the threads more closely, I see that Brent and Verne are refuting falsehood, and I am convinced now that I should do the same.  I don't anticipate a long, drawn-out conversation.  I just want to say my bit on the matter and then I'll leave off of commenting on it.  

But before I do so, Matt, let's get it straight what you are saying. Tell us what you disagree with.
 
1.  The Geftakys assembly was cult-like, if not a full blown cult.

2.  It's founder, George Geftakys, is a wicked man.

3.  Not all, but many leading brothers were partakers in George's sins by, in the very least, knowing about some or most of his actions and not doing or saying anything about them. Some even took part in spiritually abusing the sheep themselves.  Of these, some have repented.
Some leading brothers refuted George and were not partakers of his sins, and these were usually maligned and/or excommunicated for it.

4.  The assembly fostered pride, exclusivism, and elitism in its members.

5.  An evidence that such pride still exists in some former members to this day is that they attack those who expose the truth about the evils of the assembly.


Arthur

Arthur----

Your 5 points are right on the money. I had put in a post and deleted it. I wish I hadn't now--I was speaking from the heart. I've gotten to the place on the Bulletin Board where I'm afraid to state anything that might cause an "argument".

What I wanted to state is that if we see someone continuing to ignore purposefully the things that we KNOW to be true(much of it in Arthur's 5 points below) let's just ignore them. Everyone has a right to state their point of view, but if they continuously post only to argue and "water down" the truth it's best to ignore them.

We've seen people depart(Brent and Verne) because we have given too much room to people who are obviously stating falsehoods and ignoring stated fact(see again Arthur's 5 points below). This BB was established to help people who have "escaped" the legalism of the Assembly, not to give a forum for those who seek to praise it or "water down" the obvious evil it has spread.

Brent started the Website to expose the Assembly and many wrongs taking place there. The light strongly exposed the darkness and much more evil came to light causing the eventual excommunication of George and the "stepping down" of the leading brothers. But there are those who would seek to "water down" this evil, lessen it, and even defend it in a manner of speaking. And we've given place to them--providing a forum for them to speak untruths.

The Lord has rebuked the evil in the Assembly--if I'm following him I will rebuke it too. The Lord has exposed the Assembly---if I'm following him will I try to cover it up? The Lord has called it great evil---if I am following him will I try to lessen it or water it down? Of course not.

I deleted my earlier post but state the same thing: I choose to ignore someone who continues in self-enforced blindness to an obvious truth. they can post til the cows come home but I will not respond any more. I hope all of us can do the same, and hopefully some of the dear people who left will return and this BB can be ablessed place again.


--Joe

This will be my last post. Yesterday I posted the message below and received an E-mail from one of the people I have been speaking about.

I realize now that this is useless. In the below statement with all sincerity I stated that "If we are following the Lord we will rebuke what he has rebuked, and not seek to cover up what he has exposed, and won't water down or try to lessen the Evil he has brought to light." We can never lessen evil---but we can try to mask it or lower it in the estimation of others.  EX: "Sure, George sinned, but...(exuses ad nauseum).

This E-mail mocked that statement saying "I'm sorry, but I was laughing very hard while reading this. Wow, Are you the Lord's spokesman now? Hmmm...So you know EXACTLY what the Lord is thinking regarding the Assembly? Wow! We have a new Pope!!! Just in time too!! This reminds me of those people that believe that getting sick is God's Judgement on you for sinning. Wow."

There's some humor there of course. But look at the attitude that is put forth. We have ALL seen George excommunicated. We have seen the brother's step down. We all know about David Geftakys beating his wife. we have all read the stories here of Assembly abuse and faulty teaching. Do we not see a rebuke from the Lord in this?? Do we not see great evil?? Do we not see how the Lord has exposed the Assembly??

Yet, this person refuses to see this. He claims that I am speaking for the Lord when it is OBVIOUS what the Lord has done through the Website and the BB. When I speak for the Lord I speak from what is an obvious occurence--to say otherwise would be to deny the work of the Lord in all of this.

So, I see that these people will continue here and it is fruitless to continue in an atmosphere like this. "If the blind lead the blind they will both fall into the ditch". I've seen what the Lord has done since the Rick Ross Website. I saw the founding of the Webiste and how the Lord used it to expose the Assembly and bring evil to light. I saw George excommunicated and all that followed.

It confirmed to me what I had known for a long time---that the Assembly had something very wrong with it. The Lord has done what he wanted to do--and now he seeks only to heal. But this BB has become only a place for bickering, and a forum for those who want to question what the Lord has really done. There has been enough rebuking, and they will not desist.

As I mentioned to this person---this BB was supposed to be a place of healing for those who have "escaped" from the legalism, and the hurts of the Assembly. If you were at an AA meeting to help get free of Alcohol, would it help you to hear someone get up and say "OH, alcohol isn't all that bad. People say it hurts people's lives, but it never hurt me. Until I seem some "reasonsable doubt" that completely convinces me I'm going to keep drinking, and I think you should too". And what if this person stood up and argued with you every time you mentioned the pain alcohol had brought to your life? Wouldn't you want this person to cease and desist? Sure, he has a right to his opinion..., or does he in a setting like that??

As long as this place continues to be forum like this I don't want to even visit here anymore. I'm sure there will be further sarcastic remarks made about this most recent post too---it's a pattern with them--to argue, make sarcastic comments and ignore obvious truth.

God bless all of you who continue to post here. I've enjoyed all of the old threads where we had great conversations and fellowship.

--Joe

Hi Joe and Arthur,
Firstly, for the record, I did not email Joe Sperling anything. I don't disagree with it though - whoever wrote that to you was calling to attention your pride - not mocking you.

Now, Arthur,
I will attempt to answer your question regarding my stands on the following 5 points:
 
1.  The Geftakys assembly was cult-like, if not a full blown cult.

Yes, of course, I disagree with this. The assembly was a church - a body of believers who came together to worship their Lord, to fellowship together, to take the Lord's supper together, to get into the Word together, to reach out to the lost together, to love each other, to help each other, etc.



2.  It's founder, George Geftakys, is a wicked man.

True.  Aren't we all wicked though? But, yes, he should have stepped down much sooner and let the other more Godly men lead.

3.  Not all, but many leading brothers were partakers in George's sins by, in the very least, knowing about some or most of his actions and not doing or saying anything about them. Some even took part in spiritually abusing the sheep themselves.  Of these, some have repented.
Some leading brothers refuted George and were not partakers of his sins, and these were usually maligned and/or excommunicated for it.

I wouldn't even say many leading brothers were partakers in GG's sins. The vast majority only saw him a few times a year. This is all repetitive of course, but how would they know about his sins? They weren't the topic of seminars or weekly phone calls with GG. Those brothers who abused the "sheep" and have repented - praise the Lord. But those LB's that haven't abused the sheep (most of them) - well no need to repent. To be honest, I believe that most of the "best" preaching did not come from GG - he was extremely hard to understand. The best came from the leading brothers. The vast majority were of Godly character and were unfailing in their service to the Lord and to their flocks.

4.  The assembly fostered pride, exclusivism, and elitism in its members.

Hardly. Exclusivism? I recall trying to get many of the lost into the assembly - not exclude them. We welcomed people from other churches to visit too. As for pride, how's that? I remember "forgive me brother" was a very standard saying in the assembly. I hate to say his name publically again, but our LB, Bob Starr, is one of the most humble men I have ever met in my entire life. Perhaps at  your assembly, you didn't invite other people to come - or you felt pride. Who knows? I can only speak from my own experience as this is all a subjective matter.

5.  An evidence that such pride still exists in some former members to this day is that they attack those who expose the truth about the evils of the assembly.

I suppose one thing I've learned about the assembly is that the sins were of men - not of the system. I've been intimidated (by you!), called names, humiliated, etc (as have Paul and Luke, Affirming, teaters, etc..) by ex-assemblyites. The same ex-assemblyites who accuse the assembly system of fostering intimidation, name calling, humiliation, hypocrisy, etc.  I've been treated far worse by ex-assemblyites than I was ever treated in the assembly. I'm not posing myself as a victim, by the way. I just wanted to point out why it was so hard to take you seriously.

I know that I have mistreated people on the bb too. You pointed that out, of course, for everyone to see, although I'm sure everybody has seen all that before. I'd like to publically apologize to Brent Tr0ckman, Verne Carty, Eulaha Long, Laurie-STL sister, Heide, Kim..I'm sorry Kimberely Tobin, Lurker, for my many harsh, unkind things. I know I've been vulgar at times and very mean-spirited. I pray that you will forgive me. I cannot apologize for my arguments though because, like you, Arthur, I feel I'm in the right with regard to my defense of certain elements of the assembly (but not all) and the LB's (big surprise).

I also apologize to any LB's or their families that may read this. Sometimes I'm worried that my defense of the LB's did nothing more than spark more posts from people blasting you. If I have been the source of any distress, please forgive me. Also forgive me for saying unkind things to the above people, forgive me if that caused you distress as well.

Do you have anymore questions, Arthur?

- Matt

About 10 years ago I did some research on cults and developed a list of common characteristics.  Here it is.

1. Most cults have some writings that constitute extra-biblical revelation.  

2.  A false basis of salvation.  Salvation redefined in some way that puts it on the basis of works.  You can never do enough works to be sure.

3.  Uncertain hope.  Constant and continuing faithfulness required.

4.  A Claim of special spiritual annointing or light by the founder.

5. Doctrinal ambiguity.  Some doctrines can't be clearly stated.
   (It's better felt than telt).

6.  A faulty doctrine of God.

7.  An enslaving organizational structure
    a. The leadership is exalted and remote
    b. There is an inner circle who support the leader and control
        the flock.
    c.  Sheperding style accountability system.

8.  Financial exploitation.

9.  Fortress mentality, usually including constant denunciation of others.

10.  Identification of individual members with the "mission" of the cult.  Loss of personal relationships and outside interests.

11.  Members committed to intensive learning and proslytizing.

12. Control through fear.  "If you leave you will...a. go into darkness.  b. Satan will get a hold on your life  c. God will punish you...you might lose your life.

I think any fair minded person can see that number one on Arthur's list is right on the money.  Anyone who can't see this simply doesn't understand the assembly system.

With the possible exception of #1 and #6 from my list, the assembly fit these elements perfectly.  The assembly was a group of Christians, so it qualifies as a Bible Based Cultic group.

Good work, Arthur.

Thomas Maddux

I spent 18 years in the assembly.  Along with Steve Irons, I was in the leading brother's meeting in Fullerton from the day it started, about 1971 or '72, until I quit in 1988.  I was also a worker during that time.

Sadly, in order to say this I have to hang my sins out for all to see, but I think this needs to be said.  All I can say is that I have repented openly, opposed GG openly, and done what I could to make amends to offended individuals.

1. All the leading brothers, in all the assemblies, were involved in the financial exploitation of the saints.  We were  taught, and taught others,  that God wanted 10% before taxes, in cash, in the box.  Other than counting this and delivering it to GG's house,(usually to Betty), no accounting of the use of this money was ever given.

This is clearly a violation of New Testament standards.  The rule is that we are to "Provide for things honest IN THE SIGHT OF ALL MEN".  No specially priveleged individuals allowed.  We failed in this.  Leading brothers had NO IDEA what was done with this money other than the vague claim that it was used for the work, "here and abroad".

2.  The leading brothers in every assembly helped GG to decieve the saints.  We learned and repeated GG's false teachings on the Church, prophecy, finances, guidance from God, and much more.

If you didn't do this YOU WEREN'T A LEADING BROTHER ANY LONGER!  None of us can escape this.  As I began to see through these teachings, I stopped teaching them and preached on other things.  But I didn't stand up and tell everyone what I thought.

Please forgive me.

3. Every assembly had at least one worker, usually more.  The workers were the third level of the assembly authority structure, (below G and B and the "special workers", and above the local leading brothers and saints.  The workers were told what to tell the saints about all the problem folks, how to answer critics, and how to maintian secrecy about any inner problems in the group.

The saints were talked about constantly.  Their loyalty, intelligence, weaknesses,  and actual or potential contribution to the work were evaluated regularly.  Problems shared in confidence with a trusted brother or sister were common knowledge among the workers.

The workers enjoyed being "in the know".  The assembly was like a small town.


Although the abuse of Judy Geftakys and, of course, GG's adultries were "inner circle" level secrets, those of us who didn't know about these things supported them by supporting the authority structure of the assembly that made the abuse possible.

We also participated in the abusive treatment of many many of the saints.  I'm not talking about the Dave/Judy type of abuse, but we micro managed the lives of hundreds of people.  We made them dependent on us, and did NOT lead them to trust the Shepherd of their souls.  The assembly leadership INTERPOSED ITSELF between the saints and God, and acted as if they were commissioned by God to rule over the flock.

It is and was a disgrace to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Forgive us all Lord.  We were blind leaders of the blind.

Nothing in my hand I bring...only to the cross I cling.

Thomas Maddux

Dear Saints, all,

     Many years ago, when we used to witness on Van Nuys Blvd., amidst thousands of lost souls searching for they knew not what, i learned to ask two questions of the people i spoke to.  They came from every imaginable background, and fell back upon any and all kinds of philosophies, religions, beliefs and hopes to argue against the gospel of Jesus Christ.
     my two questions were:  [1.] Is it possible that you are wrong?  [2.] If you are wrong, do you want to find out and learn what is right?  These were not conversation-starters.  i pressed for a simple, direct YES or NO answer to both queries.  If the answer to either was "No," i usually moved on to someone else before long.  But if the answer to both questions was "Yes," the door had been opened for witness and prayer.
     Those same two questions are applicable to every person on the globe, and good for every situation.  i ask them of myself all the time, and i don't accept discussion for a reply (i don't want to listen to my rationalizations).  Just YES or NO.  It's pretty simple, no matter what the subject is.  Whatever you believe about the assembly, the Bulletin Board, this or that brother or sister, just ask yourself:  Could I be wrong?  If I am wrong, do I want to find out what's right?
     The inference of question #1 is not negative.  Being wrong is not a sin.  Being wrong is a natural occurence and common to all mankind.  Being wrong only affirms that you are not God.
     Question #2 can be quite revealing.  How important is image to you?  Would you rather attempt to convince yourself and others that you are right than to find out you are wrong and have to adjust your direction and reputation?  One day each of us will stand face to face with our Lord and he will show us every detail of our lives.  Will we be able to look at the scars he received for us, then look into his eyes if we have avoided the truth in this life for the sake of comfort or reputation?
     Does it take courage to answer these questions honestly?  No, but the fear that it may require more courage than we have can keep us from an honest answer.
What it takes to say "Yes" to both questions is faith in the Son of God.  "Is anything too great for Thee?"  He has begun a great work in us, and will continue it until the great day of the Lord Jesus Christ.  Never be afraid of the truth, for he is the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free.

     Remember, i said i ask these two questions of myself all the time?  Well, the truth is that you can't really apply them to anyone else unless you are willing to first (and frequently) apply them to yourself!  Try it.  Sincerely.  You'll be glad you did.

al Hartman

This is so sad. We have another ex-LB who, because he felt led to repent personally, thinks that every other LB needs to repent.


First of all, 10% is standard teaching in most churches - not just the assembly. Secondly, I don't know about other assemblies, but they never asked me for any money for anything more than paying for campus conferences and seminars. They never forced anybody to give a dime. If a saint gave money, it was freely. Also, if they were told the money was "used for the work here and abroad," and they continued to give freely, then obviously that was enough accounting to satisfy the saint. Perhaps you feel that you financially exploited the saints - in which case you are right to repent. But don't start throwing around that "it wasn't just me, it was everybody..."


As an LB in Fullerton, obviously GG had a lot more control over what you said. I remember messages from Brian Daum about what we would do without GG - he pointedly reminded us that GG wasn't going to be around forever. He specifically recognized that the saints were too dependent on GG. So, unlike you, he did stand up and say what he thought. As for false teaching, that's been thrown around forever. If a requirement for a church is to be perfect, then Mr. Maddux, give up the search now. I also believe the label "false-teaching" and "cult" is thrown around too loosely. I believe that the LB's (or any of the other brothers) were led to get up and preach. God clearly spoke to the saints through many of these brothers' messages.


Quite a strong statement. Did you visit every single assembly to ascertain that nothing was kept in confidence? There's a lot of generalizations going on here on such a serious topic. If you're going to haughtily prance around pointing your finger at every LB, you better be sure that every LB betrayed confidences.



The structure that made the abuse possible? You'll find adultery and wife-beating outside the assembly - and you'll find that it's far more widespread. Again, being in Fullerton, you had access to a lot more information than the LB's at other assemblies. Perhaps you knew things before - you're right to repent for that. But it's been established that the vast majority of LB's didn't know about the adultery and the wife beating - and thus are not guilty of supporting it.


Ok, I see. You say "we also participated in the abusive treatment of the saints." I can understand where you are coming from now. I would feel guilty too if I harmed the saints. However, because you abused the saints doesn't mean all the LB's did. It reminds me of a little kid who gets in trouble and then tries to implicate his innocent brother too so he doesn't have to be in trouble alone. It also isn't very logical:

I was abusive, thus all LB's were abusive. I speak German, thus everybody speaks German...

As for your cult list:
"12. Control through fear.  "If you leave you will...a. go into darkness.  b. Satan will get a hold on your life  c. God will punish you...you might lose your life."

We might lose our life if we leave the assembly? No, sir - that's ridiculous. What an imagination! Your self-composed list of cultic traits is quite off base.

"Members commited to intensive learning and proselytizing."

We are called on the Bible to reach out to the lost, sir. As for intensive learning, that's hardly a sin.

"Fortress mentality"

I believe many, many people were welcomed into the assemblies. If it was a fortress, then the Bible study invites should have said:

"bible study, mira mesa senior citizen center, tuesday 7:30pm. Oh, but you can't come."

"Financial Exploitation"

Already touched on this.

Mr. Maddux, you asked for forgiveness for your abuse of the saints. God has already forgiven you - accept his forgiveness rather than trying to implicate innocent leading brothers.

- Matt

Dear Saints,

     I have already replied personally to both Tom & Matt regarding their latest posts.  These are some general thoughts for all:
      As a matter of record, i agree with Tom's assessment, in principle, for the following reasons:  
     Both Tom's & my experience was confined to Fullerton, the San Fernando Valley, and workers' conferences, all of which were tightly within George's grip (neither of us was ever "sent out into the work").  Within those venues, it was deliberately made very clear to us that George intended to have absolute power in and over all the assemblies & works with which he was associated.  He assigned Fullerton-trained "workers" to all the assemblies for the express purpose of seeing that his directives were carried out, and reporting to him if they were not.  If there were LBs doing and/or saying things that exceeded George's parameters, it was only because for some reason he was unaware of it.  Otherwise they would have been immediately removed from their positions, and shortly thereafter from fellowship.  This is not speculation on my part.  i have heard it stated & seen it implemented.
     i hope you can see that this is why the assembly "system," or structure was not Christian-- because a tyrant  blocked access to the throne of grace, and assigned his minions to enforce his will.  Was salvation through Christ preached?  Absolutely.  But as soon as it was accepted by anyone, it began to be distorted and controlled.  Those who could not or would not be controlled were encouraged or forced to leave, in a manner that made it seem to be their (rebellious) choice.  Again, we saw this repeatedly and at that time we accepted & condoned it.
     Exceptions were not permitted, so if they occurred (as some say happened in their assemblies), it would have been by God's hand, and we (George & the "inner circle") would not have known it.  Could the Lord have done such a thing and none of us been aware of it?  Of course!  That's precisely why the possibility that it actually did happen  never occurred to any of us, perhaps, until now.  George's control seemed so absolute, that none of us could imagine its being bypassed, and since we accepted him as God's servant, the idea that God would circumvent him never occurred to us.
     The threads of the overall tapestry we are looking at are as varied as the individual lives involved.  God looks down upon the finished work, while we are still seeing the knotted and twisted underside of it.  You have never been me, nor i you.  We have not seen each what the other has seen.  We all need to cut each other some slack, and stop imagining that just because i have repeatedly explained something to my own satisfaction, everyone else is obliged to find it obvious.  Not by might(y argument) nor by power(ful teaching), but by My Spirit, saith the Lord.

In the love of Christ,
al Hartman

I received a similar email, Joe, immediately after posting the five points about the problems of the assembly.  I think we see a pattern here.  Stand for the truth about the assembly and you'll get an email from someone who doesn't like it that you did, personally attacking you.  


This is such an excellent analogy!  The rest of us who are seeking recovery from "alcoholism" (aka assemblyism) should stand up and kick the hoodlums out.  

Arthur

Hi all.

I'd rather not give you my real name just yet.  I too was in a Geftakys assembly for a long time.  I too have stories of how I was hurt (and unfortunately, how I hurt others) in my participation in George's system.

I'd like to thank Brian Tucker for getting rid of certain troublemakers who were trying to sow confusion on this BB.  Now that they are gone, I have a request.  Could this thread be dedicated to news of assemblies that are still meeting, especially in Southern California, and of how God is dealing with them?  I think when we all hear of the complete disappearance of everything George started, it will help many of us come to closure regarding all this.

Welcome, M.  I understand not wanting to use your real name.  Some people are still being told by their leaders that to read the bb or web site is to participate in divisive gossip, listen to railers attacking God's servants, etc.  I find that hard to understand after the rather spectacular fall of this work, but it's happening.
I agree that any of us around for any length of time were both hurt by the assembly ways, and hurt others, though I believe we meant well and thought we were serving the Lord.
I hope we do hear what's going on in the other places.  We certainly spent enough nights of prayer praying for them.  It'd be helpful to hear how things turned out after all.
Becky Wieser, Annandale,VA since late 1987, out and very glad since Jan. '03.

M,
I too would like to here the testimonies of those in Southern CA. Assemblies deliverence from the bondage of the Geftakys system.
Mark

I guess I'm a little dense.  I am wondering what info you are wanting.  You want news of "assemblies that are still meeting"?  But then "I think when we all hear of the complete disappearance of everything George started, it will help many of us come to closure regarding all this."  

I know that there are still assemblies meeting and I think it will be difficult to really give a clear picture as to what is transpiring i.e. "How is God dealing with them".  Why?  Because those who are still meeting are not talking with those of us who have left (we are looked at as divisive and railers.)

For example, I know that West L.A. is still meeting, going strong and that they tell their flock that they should not visit this website or others like it, that it is gossip and lies.  Placentia is still meeting and much like West L.A., they don't want to entertain any discussion as to what was wrong with the Assembly.  Santa Barbara is still meeting trying to reevaluate things (I don't think they are going far enough however, as until you are "out" and under correct teaching, how can you truly understand what was wrong about the assembly?)

I know that the assembly in the S.F. Valley disbanded but the members are scattered to the four winds and those who were still apart of the "assembly" when it disbanded, who didn't "choose to leave" are struggling.  There are saints who refuse to have anything to do with those who left before the whole fiasco in January.  I believe this is due to the fact that they didn't "leave".  The assembly just stopped having their meetings.  These people don't even see that there were huge problems with the assembly.

Could you clarify what information you are wanting in order to answer accordingly?

Kimberly,

The information you just posted is exactly what I'm looking for.   I'm glad that the Valley has disbanded, though I'm sorry for the people who are struggling.  I am praying that the other groups disband also.

mithrandir

I agree with you and hope that all the assembly's disband.  However, though some may still disband it is truly essential that individuals pursue godly instruction as to doctrinal issues.  It is not enough to just disband.  The indoctrination that occurred in the assembly makes many ripe for another "assembly".  

My experience with individuals in the S.F. Valley display this issue clearly.  My husband and family left in October last year before the whole GG excommunication.  Many individuals would not have anything to do with us once we left.  My husband and I thought that once GG was excommunicated, we would be vindicated and these same people would now be willing to fellowship with us and would in fact apologize for their treatment of our family.  But no such luck!  They have left "the assembly", but the "assembly teaching" is still alive and well in their actions.  So, though the SF Valley assembly has disbanded, it's teachings are alive and well in many of the adherants who are now attending other churches.  

SCARY!!!!!!!!  

Thankfully, there are some who will communicate with us and we are trying to reach out to these individuals.  But here to, it is a difficult situation, because some don't want to discuss the assembly.  They look at it as being divisive and negative and not honoring to the Lord.  So you prayerfully move forward attempting to love these individuals with grace.  (Something that was greatly lacking in the assembly).

Good to hear from someone new on the BB (albeit disguised for now.)

I am posting this as someone who was committed to the San Diego assembly for close to 9 years.  I do want to point out to you, Matt, that your involvement here was only very superficial.  In fact, most was in Del Cerro, which was even further away from GG's influence.  I don't think this is a bad thing.  I think it is good for anyone the less they were involved.  However, I suspect that you missed seeing much of the evil that happened.  We were very good at hiding it, and putting on a good front.

There is a lot that could be said about each of these points.  Worship-we promoted, encouraged, and even enforced a very elitist notion of what worship was.  We were the ones who defined who was able to partake, and who was not.  The format of our "worship" meeting, down to the minute, was defined by GG.  I know that many had a desire for the Lord, but what we practiced could best be described as strange.  I'll admit, though, that I was very caught up in it.

Reachiing out to the lost--we preached the gospel, yes, but our underlying goal was to see people commit to the assembly.  Underlying it all was an attitude that what we were involved with was the center of God's work today.

Love each other--sorta.  We cared for each other as long as they were willing to fill the mold.  Those who were once committed, and then decided to leave were treated as wicked and evil.  I know this is true, I've had to go and reconcile my relationship with some of these.

George was not in a position like a pastor, or an elder.  I think a good way to describe it would be like a pope, or dictator.  The men under him who would have stepped in weren't there because they were godly, they were there because George chose them.  When George fell, the entire system collapsed.  When pastors fall, or elders fall, the church usually continues.  We weren't a church, just pretending.  We were just participants in George's ego trip.
Be careful, since what you say is very much not true.  San Diego was rare in that we had a leading brother who was not a worker.  The other LBs went to joint workers meetings every month, and were frequently in contact with GG (or someone directly under him in Fullerton).  When GG came to visit, the attitude portrayed was that a great apostle was coming to visit.  We felt that there would be a special blessing we would receive when GG preached here, even if it made no sense.

Remember, I'm still good friends with several of these men.  But, even though San Diego was further out of GG's grasp, he still wielded his hand here.  A good word to describe what I saw would be deception.  They felt they were serving God, and yet did evil things in following this man.
Why did we go three times a year to hear GG preach for about 14 hours?  Those LBs were the ones who made us feel as if we were turning away from the Lord if we didn't go hear GG preach.
Exclusivism is not excluding other people, but the very deep belief that there was something special about the assembly.  We invited people from other churches, because we felt that the assembly was a more perfect representation of the church, and that you couldn't truly serve the Lord in another church.

You were shielded from much of this, Matt, because you were new.  New people had a great buffer from reality.  The truth was only shown as people could handle it.  This is a very standard cult practice.
I agree with you about Bob.  I think this was clearly demonstrated by his humility when he learned the reality about GG.

But, we were very prideful.  That's why we invited people.  That's why we tried to formulate our prayers right in the meetings.  That motivated much of the preaching.

Perhaps I will share more in another thread...

Hi David,

I have never met you.  I was a LB in Fullerton from '71 to '88, and I hit the road for good in '89.

What you have said about the involvement of all the LB's with GG and his invisible hand is true.  He ran everything.

I would suggest that you read the entire thread called, "The Robinson's have hurt the saints"  Seems there was a big conspiracy to damage this BB and many of the posts written by one person (supposedly) were actually done, or at least dictated, by someone else.

Thomas Maddux

That thread is much of the reason that I have stayed away from the BB for some time now.  I'm glad to see there are still voices of reason here, even if you have to filter through to find them.  :-\

I think there is benefit in flushing things out, to bring about closure and healing.  So many are just trying to get on with things.  Yes, there is value in moving forward, but sometimes there are things that just have to be dealt with.

I'm thankful that the Lord has brought me into a wonderful church.  http://www.cbcsandiego.com/ (http://www.cbcsandiego.com/) and you can even read their statement of faith  :) .  However, they don't really understand what I've gone through (or we've gone through).  It is even complicated when people ask where I went to church before.

Dave

Actually, I think what Tom is talking about is in "Why Luke Robinson May Become a Future Assembly Leader."  This thread, "Existing Assemblies," is in a way a continuation of that.  Some of the later posts of one of the main posters in these threads were written by someone else.

The creator of the thread "The Robinsons have hurt the flock" was an outsider who posted under two names: "Laurie" and "St. Louis sister".  She fabricated the whole scenario of the thread.

David---


Thanks for what you shared. It's good to get a view
from someone else involved in San Diego. It appears
it was "business as usual" there also. I suspected as
much.

take care, and God bless,  Joe

Thank you for shedding some light on this, David.

It was mostly "business as usual" until the excommunication.  There was only one meeting after that, and that was just because we just hadn't met yet to discuss what we wanted to do.

However, GG didn't have as drastic of an involvement here as in some other assemblies, so I'm thankful.  It could have been a lot worse.

Dave

David-
Just wanted to say 'amen' to your post to Matt about San Diego.  Well said.  I think if you change the names of the people, you have much the same story, assembly after assembly.  It sure sounds familiar from out here in Annandale.
BTW, I remember when you visited here, and I'm glad to know you're out and doing well.
Thankful for His mercy on us all,
Becky

The cogency of David Brown's reportage notwithstanding, does anyone think for one pico-second that an individual like Matt Peeling/Luke Robinson would be persuaded? His response, were he/they still given leeway to foam and froth, would have been entirely predictable. Thanks Dave for the first hand reporting of what has been confirmed several times over by numerous witnesses, Matt Peeling and Luke Robinson's depraved, deceived, and deceptive ramblings notwitstanding...
Verne

Dear David,

     Thank you for stepping up.  It is good for all of us to hear from you the things you have seen, experienced and know to be true.  i don't know how difficult it was for you to do, but i am (and i'm sure many others are) grateful for your courage and openness.

     Matt has been banned from this BB for the present, but i would like to see him hear what you have told us.  What harm could it do?  But it could be an avenue for his deliverance...  i will Fwd nothing, however, until i have heard from at least two of:  Brent, Mark C., Tom M., Brian:  Brothers, your thoughts???

Gratefully, in Christ,
al Hartman

I also thank you David!
  AL asked for my opinion and so I will step up to the plate and take my swings.(If the subject were San Diego and baseball I would decline comment due to the present poor showing of our beleagured Padres ;))
  When I first starting hearing Matt's presentation of life in the San Diego Assembly I thought that possibly I had encountered something new and different in respect to the groups associated with GG and the headquarters in Fullerton.
  After all, I have been out for over 12 years and maybe they had developed some new moderate positions in response to the best selling Enroth books that exposed their abusive system.
   It is clear now that Matt's memory was either distorted or he was interested in presenting a false image.  I tried to respectfully engage him in conversation re. these issues and he refused to have a reasonable conversation.  When I point blank asked him what he understood the Gospel to mean he also refused to answer.
   We now understand that Matt had an agenda to destroy the credibility of those who are attempting to help those who were/are trapped in an evil system that distorted the meaning of the Gospel and the purpose of Christ in His people.
   I hope that Matt, Luke, and those behind the scenes supporting them, repent of these wolfish tactics and repent of their ways.  I also pray that they would turn to a life that honors God and seeks to honestly pursue the truth.  They have much to apologize to me personally for and to those who they have hurt on this site.
                                      God Bless those who love Jesus Christ in sincerity,  Mark

Matt heard everything that Dave Brown said many times over.  Matt wouldn't read the truth, wouldn't listen to the truth, and if he heard it by accident, he railed against it.

What in God's name makes you, Al, think that by hearing it yet again he would change one bit?  Yesterday, Matt tried to hack in to Paul Hohulin's account.  (At least one of Matt's IP's did, so it could have been Luke.)

Al, I have to ask you what is wrong with your thinking? How can you support these people behind the scenes, lie to us, behave more like Kofi Anon than a Christian, and then, after everything is clear, ask for him to come back?

What is your problem?  

For the record, I view Matt as a casualty, and you as the problem.  Your middle of the road stance does nothing more than make the truth more like a lie, and the lie more of a half truth.  

I know I said I wouldn't be posting again, but someone had to tell it like it is.  I won't answer your mail, or communicate with you until you own up to what you have done, and publicly confess it on this forum.  

I don't know if it's medication, or a serious spiritual deception, but you have done more to harm Matt than help him, and I am NOT going to let you slide.  Do I sound angry?  Good, I am.

Never again,

Brent Tr0ckman

Al,

Here's my opinion;  Matt Peeling's conduct on this board has been despicable.  It is true that a few of the more mature brothers used some very negative language in criticizing Matt.  One brother said he was "depraved".  To me that word describes pedophiles, serial killers and such.  Not stubborn foolish kids.  (And yes, I mean kids.  I don't think anyone really grows up until about the mid-20's.)

BUT, after 33 years as a teacher I have heard enough people blame their misdeeds on others who, "made me mad" or something equally ridiculous.

I have heard or seen absolutely no sign of any repentance whatsoever.  Last time I checked, it was the offender that needs to make things right.  

So, I think he should be kicked off the board until such a time as he shows some real repentance.

Thomas Maddux

Against s---------, the gods themselves contend in vain...
Verne
p.s. Of course if Al is really desperate he could always have Matt do a bit of "Ghostwriting"( I don't say holy!)...now there's an idea...!

Dear Ones All,

     Thanks for your responses.   i sincerely apologize for being unclear:   i have Matt's email address, and was only asking your advice as to whether or not to forward David's posts to him.  As matters stand, the question is moot, as someone else has apparently done that very thing.  The idea of inviting Matt back onto the BB honestly never entered my mind.

in Christ,
al Hartman

the main point of cutting off guest access is not to stop anyone from reading whats posted, but rather to stop guests from posting. this is a public forum, so anything posted here can be forwarded to anyone. it seems clear to me that this was your question, al. thanks for asking.

Some thoughts and news regarding existing assemblies:

1. I just read the thread, "Ominous Signs" on another BB that deals with the Assemblies of George Geftakys.  I believe that there really are ominous signs that some of the Geftakysites are starting to re-group.  From what I've been hearing, some of the ex-leaders are being less than truthful.

2. I know of at least one gathering in Southern California that is still meeting, whose leaders have lied to their "flock" thus: "We have separated ourselves from George.  In Fullerton, there was a huge degree of entanglement with George, but praise God, we were not as entangled.  We see no reason to alter anything we are doing; rather, praise God, we are going on with what the Lord wants."  This wouldn't be so bad if only this gathering kept to themselves, but they are actively going out and recruiting others to join them - thus setting up many innocent people for future abuse. >:(  Gandalf says, "The burned hand teaches best," but it's a shame for people to have to suffer third degree burns over all their souls just to find out what a rotten group this is.

mithrandir

Sell them, give the money to the poor, and then they'll have treasure in heaven.

Greetings MM:
I was hoping you were being tongue-in-cheek! ;)

I have heard a rumor that Annendale (mind my spelling) is still in business as an assembly. Can anyone verify?

Heide

Does anyone know where assemblies are still meeting? I know Fullerton, San Francisco, Sacramento. Anywhere else?

Heide

Ottawa, Hastings, St. Louis, Champaign (tiny group), Chicago, Charleston, Altoona, Santa Barbara, Annandale

Don't forget Placentia!  Although I am praying for a swift end to that gathering.

mithrandir

Re: existing assemblies

In reading this thread, it occurs to me that in looking for "existing assemblies" we are forgetting that, in the case of the foreign countries, most of the "assemblies" were not such in the sense that those in the US were.  People, correct me if I'm wrong, but a fair number of the congregations outside of North America that George visited were not directly "raised up" by him, especially those groups in the Netherlands, and, in a certain sense, Nigeria.  Even the house churches in China that George visited I don't think were raised up directly by him.  Note that he was INVITED (so we were told) to these places.  Of course, having seen him in action for sixteen years, and having read numerous stories of his deceitful boasting, I would not surprised if he muscled his way in to a number of gatherings abroad and then CLAIMED to have been God's instrument in the founding of these "works" .

I make this point because there is something so "Assembly-like" we do when we "confer with the wounded (meet with other former assemblyites and commiserate)" and "number the opposition (count how many assemblies are still meeting)".  To many if not most of us that were involved the group was all.  To many that have left under duress the group is still all (all-evil, all-bad, all-what have you), even the obsession of those yet recently escaped, who wonder how they could have been so taken by George.  But the "assembly way" was very hard and fast--you are with us, or you are not!!!!  Even those having escaped the system still think as if they are under it. So we have difficulty imagining that ANYTHING George touched could have any good remaining in it.  But not everybody he preached to was "the Assembly".

By the way, not all of the former California assemblies are meeting.
San Diego and San Luis Obispo, as well as Huntington Beach, are, to the best of my knowledge, no longer meeting.

Matthew, I agree that not all gatherings that George visited were directly under his influence.  However, saints from China, Europe, Africa were considered to be 'workers' and came yearly to the Worker's Conference.  So I guess, once they are made aware of the situation re. GG, then it becomes their choice as to what they are going to do about it.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Hey all:

Oh, by the way, the San Fernando Valley (one of the two city of Los Angeles assemblies) is no longer meeting either.

Marcia:

You are correct in what you say as far as the invitees to the Workers' seminar having to decide whether or not to receive.  From all that I hear and read, I gather that all of the internationals have asked him to stay away unless or until he repents.

Matt (NOT from San Diego!!) Sciaini

Regarding existing assemblies...

Someone very close to me is considering meeting in the "New Testament Pattern" again, or something like that, and would like to meet with other ex-assembly members in our area.  And there are actually other people interested too!  AHHH!  

I'm looking for any articles or insightful posts that deal with the issue of why it probably isn't a great idea for an Assembly to "start up again."  I mentioned lack of accountability for leadership, no involvement of the greater church/body, but I'd like to have something to give them, that is NOT too terribly on the cerebral side, if that's possible.  This person has found it difficult to move on and attend any other churches.

I know this topic has been covered, and any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

I think you spelled it wrong.  It should be AAAH!

Maybe what's needed is some kind of directory of recommended churches for people who don't know where to go.  Perhaps a table which lists various things about each church.  I'm assuming that the main factor is people's fear of the unknown.  Some info would probably make things easier for them.

Thanks Stephen, for the spelling correction and the suggestion!   ;)

My friend KNOWS about lots of other great churches, and even has ex-assembly friends who go to them (Calvary Chapel, evangelical mega-churches), yet the interest still remains to re-group to some degree.  There is a definite "nothing else will match what we had" attitude that is hard to shake when you start attending other churches.  I've even found it difficult, and I have NO desire to meet like we used to.

I agree with what you said about fear.  Although I think my friend is fearful of just how much they need to re-learn.

Any other thoughts out there on why it's not a good idea for a former Assembly to regroup?  Or is it a fine idea???

Stephen,
In Canada it's AHHH not AAAH! We follow the British English, not the American English.  (just joking) :)

Calgary sis,

The reasons for the assembly to disband and NOT re-group are many. But, fundamentally, if one views the assembly as being a false religion (nice word for cult) then there is no reason to re-group.

In looking for a place of Christian fellowship someone wisely adviced me to look for power not pattern.  And read the book 'The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse'.

The assembly did not have the final word on 'how to meet'.  Why is it the 'only' thing that people say is the reason that they like the assembly?  Why isn't it because "we see Christ's love in our midst"? or...

Love and God bless
Marcia

John 9:34-35
They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us?  And they cast him out.  Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?

The following from a commentary by Calvin was quoted in a Sunday school class about a week ago:

---

If he (the healed blind man) had been kept in the synagogue, he would have run the danger of becoming gradually alienated from Christ and plunged into the same destruction as the ungodly.  ...  We have known the same thing in our own time.  For when Luther, and others like him, were beginning to reprove the grosser abuses of the Pope, they had scarcely the slightest taste for pure Christianity.  But after the Pope had fulminated against them and cast them out of the Roman synagogue by terrifying bulls, Christ stretched out his hand and made himself fully known to them.  So there is nothing better for us than to be far away from the enemies of the Gospel so that he may come near to us.

---

The problem with former assembly people regrouping is that it would produce a tremendous resistance to change, so that the false teachings that they have been indoctrinated with for years would never have a chance to be cleared up.

What are the best sellers?  I only know of "Churches that Abuse."  I would like to know what else to read!  Thanks!

God bless,
Amy

Matt, this paragraph in a nutshell sums up what you are fighting about.  And yes, you are fighting.  I intend to call a spade a spade.  This shows me you have zero recognition of the essential issues of sinfulness and darkness of the leadership of the Assembly.  Yes, all leaders have sin -- no one is perfect.  But the leaders in the Assembly had grave defects, enumerated not only by Brent, but testimony after testimony of people who have been involved.  Yes, not all of them were corrupt.  Brent, I believe, WAS a leading brother himself.  I could be wrong about this -- correct me if I'm wrong -- but I think he was.  However, that virtue often lost them their jobs.  That should indicate a problem right there.

Ask yourself why you are blind to these problems right in front of your nose?

I am confused.  You acknowledge that God has spoken to Kim.  But then you assert God said something different to you about the SAME SUBJECT.  Do you really think God contradicts Himself?

I have no idea why you think Brent is saying that ALL leading brothers are "responsible for hurting the flock."  He has said over and over in this thread that he does NOT think so.

I also noticed that you are referring to the tremendous display of "love" and "outreach" shown in the Assembly.  You're right -- you can't find that degree of personal involvement pretty much anywhere else EXCEPT ANOTHER CULT.  I know, I tried.  I went to "regular" churches and not only did they not get that involved with me, they sometimes fell flat on their face.  I judged them very harshly for that.  I was comparing them with the standards set by the Assembly as far as the intense participation went.  It took me a long time to realize the Assembly was unrealistic.  I believe your leading brother was a sincere, kind and generous person.  I will not knock him.  But he was in a leadership role in a clearly abusive, destructive, rotten-to-the-core group and he has to answer for that.  As someone said in another post, ALL leaders are accountable, not just Christian ones.

Thanks Stephen.
This I will pass on.   :)

Matt, I have decided not to talk to you any longer.  It is clear that you are resisting all efforts to show you another side of the story and that you are stubbornly persisting in your own opinion in spite of the evidence shown you by several witnesses.

May God be with you.

Hi Marcia

Thanks for replying!

I appreciate and see your last point!  I'd rather see the love of Christ than a pattern, personally.   :)

What if we don't see the Assembly as a "false religion" or "cult?"  I'm not saying it isn't true, but I don't see it right now.  I'd just be falling in line if I heartily agreed it was a cult.  Perhaps the word "cult" needs to be clarified?   ???  

Also, many people refer to GG's work as "rotten to the root", or something like that.  Like he led a double life sinning on the side since before the assemblies began?  I don't know what anyone is talking about.  All we got locally is that last ex-comm. letter.  

Does one separate the man from the ministry?

Anyhow, I appreciate your responses, as I'm still learning, and the veil is still being lifted!   :)

I, too, am interested in the Southern California assemblies, or what's left of them, particularly Huntington Beach.  Any news of them?

There are some very good articles on what makes a cult here on the rickross.com site:

http://www.rickross.com/brainwashing.html

http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing8.html

http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing21.html



Here may be what you have heard.  It is a glimpse of the history of pre-assembly George.  

http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/FinalWeeks/RaisedUpOfGod.htm

And there are many more aritcles on the www.geftakysassembly.com website.

Thank you very much!

God bless,
Amy

Calgary sis

I borrowed a book from the library 'A Guide to Cults and New Religions' by Ronald Enroth & Others.
I scanned in this from page 197:

EVALUATING CULTS AND NEW RELIGIONS

1. Does a member's personality generally become stronger, happier, more confident as a result of contact with the group?
2. Do members of the group seek to deepen and strengthen their family commitments?
3. Does the group encourage independent thinking and the development of discernment skills?
4. Does the group allow for individual differences of belief and behavior, particularly in areas of less-than-central importance?
5. Does the group encourage high moral standards both among members and between members and nonmembers?
6. Does the group's leadership invite dialog, advice and evaluation from outside its own immediate circle?
7. Does the group allow for development in theological beliefs?
8. Are group members encouraged to ask the hard questions without threat of reprisal of any kind?
9. Do group members appreciate truth wherever it is found, even if it is outside their group?
10. Is the group honest in dealing with nonmembers, especially as it tries to win them to the group?
11. Does the group foster relationships and linkages with the larger society-connections that are more than self-serving?

Marcia

Thanks Marcia
I will print and pass this along.
 :)

Greetings from the east coast-

Just to clarify.  The assembly raised up through the ministry of Geo. Geftakys in Annandale, VA, now consists of the four leading brothers & their families (all former workers), and two other families.  One of those families is here on a temporary duty military assignment.  All the rest are out the assembly, and have been for some time now.  So it's not just "the Wiesers and a few others" who left the assembly here.   ::)

Phill & Becky

The most recent news:

Heritage Christian School (formerly Cornerstone Academy) will not have a fall term this year.  They haven't decided whether to try again in the spring or to let the school end.

mithrandir

What was Heritage Schools enrollment?  What was the make up of children in the assembly vs. not in the assembly?  Was it mostly assembly people who were the teachers, or normal people?

I have a more specific question, does anyone know what is up with Dave & Janet Zorn? Are they still hard core? Does anyone see any cracking in the veneer?

Heide

MM,

It's amazing how many people in so many of GG's assemblies claim that they had such wonderful assemblies that were not affected by George, isn't it?  They say that in the Midwest and even in one gathering in Southern California (yeah, they must have been soooooooo far away from George's influence).  It's kinda like the 4 kids that are asked by the mom, "Ok, who took the cookies from the cookie jar?"  Of course, all of them respond (with chocolate all over their faces), "Not me!"

So, they've changed the name to Heritage Christian School, huh?  Nice move.  I'm sure everyone in and around Fullerton and Placentia are totally fooled by the new name.  Of course, their assembly-ism will still stick out like a sore thumb.

In answer to the question about who goes to Cornerstone/Heritage, I believe it is largely assembly kids (as if they didn't get enough assembly indoctrination on evenings and weekends and at summer camp).  Last year I heard that they were trying to get non-assembly kids to go there.  I can just imagine the comments from those students:  "Mom, why are those people so weird?  I'd rather get beat up at a public school than go to THAT school."

Jack

Latest news:

There is no longer an assembly in Wisconsin.

In Southern California, there is still:
1. West LA
2. Placentia (their leaders are being less than honest about some things)
3. Fullerton
4. Riverside (but they are now very small)

Anyone know about Pasadena?  Have I left anything out?

mithrandir

I know that Santa Barbara is still an assembly.  Only one family and one couple has left since January.  They are trying to put new wine in old wineskins and they have changed meeting places.

Jack

This is from Ronald Enroth again:

Definitions of Cults

pg 15 - For the Christian the most significant component of a definition of cult is theological in nature. This is because basic issues of truth and error are involved. ... unlike the typical person whose religious naiveté precludes any serious interest in doctrinal matters, the Christian must be able to distinguish truth from error.

pg 17 - "After all, what really matters is not a label of 'conventional' or 'unconventional' religion, but God's objective truth."
While secularists may exhibit disdain for the theological side of the cult question, evangelical Christians have been guilty of focusing almost exclusively on doctrinal/theological concerns and have neglected the psychosocial aberrations of cults. As one concerned Christian layman put it (without suggesting that we abandon a theological critique of the cults), "I think there is merit for placing more stress on the other danger zones created by the cults, such as psychological and moral injury , disruption of family ties, impairment of scholastic and professional careers."

I thought Seattle had disbanded.... Did they re-establish?

Latest news:

It appears that Heritage Christian School (formerly Cornerstone Academy) has definitely gone out of business.  The indicators of this are that parents are putting their kids into other schools, and at least two teachers have publicly stated that they are looking for jobs elsewhere.

Here is a list of Geftakys groups (oops, I meant assemblies) still remaining:

Seattle, WA
Sacramento, CA
San Francisco, CA
Santa Barbara, CA
Pasadena, CA
West LA, CA
Riverside, CA
Placentia, CA
Hastings, NE
Omaha, NE
Fullerton, CA

Could you please all do me a favor?  Please post whatever accurate information you have about the present condition and activities of each of these groups.  Please post whatever accurate information you have on their leaders - what kind of men they are, and what they're still doing in these groups.  Also, do any of them still have "training homes" or other situations of potential abuse?  And are there any other groups not included in this list?

mithrandir

UNBELIEVABLE!!!!  Who do these yahoos think they are?  How many more lives are going to be damaged or even ruined by these eqotistical maniacs.  They have as much business leading or sheperding as OJ Simpson does giving marriage counseling!

Message to current members of the assembly - "Cut the umbilical cord, get a mind of your own, and get a life!"

Don't forget Annadale, Norfolk and Chicago and St. Louis, as well as Ottawa and perhaps other Canadian groups.  As you know, many of these groups are merely a family or two still meeting.  Riverside is basically one family and a single brother, hardly a church by anyone's standard, but George preaches there...other groups are continuing with a "new" format, which means a few less meetings and they are generally nicer to eachother.  Some of the Assemblies that have disbanded, like St. Louis, still have a meeting going on, but it is not the old Assembly, but some people who just can't give it up.  Others, like Santa Barbara, are trying as hard as they can to be something new and vital, and are willing to explore past errors to some degree, but are totally unwilling to entertain the idea that decades of deception and a blind committment to George's pattern leave them unfit to lead a church.  

Nevertheless, there is a huge difference between Santa Barbara and San Francisco...at least I hope there is.

I really want to encourage everyone to read this:

http://www.reveal.org/library/stories/people/kdegge.html (http://www.reveal.org/library/stories/people/kdegge.html)

---

Here is a quote from part of it:

I refer you to ten charges I have made against the leadership of the ICoC for years, first compiled for use in counseling settings in 1994 (3):

I make the following charges against the principle participants in the formal leadership heirarchy of the International Church of Christ Movement. I want to stress that several of these are realities of which many of the “rank and file” members of the Movement would have no conscious awareness, though their participation in this system, no matter how unwitting, serves to support. However, I do charge the formal leaders with the responsibility for the “intentionality” and perpetuation of these offenses.

I charge the top leaders of the ICC Movement with:

Mishandling and distorting (“twisting”) the Scriptures and their meanings, with great consistency and persistence, to reinforce their biased doctrines.
Systematically and deliberately misrepresenting themselves and many of their ends (i.e., goals and purposes) to both grassroots members and outsiders.
Offering what’s called “unconditional love” for a price (i.e., thorough compliance of the would-be “convert”), amounting, in net effect, to spiritual “prostitution.”
As a result of the practice of marketing this conditional “love,” painting and promoting a practical picture of God as a “Cosmic Pimp.” (This is strong language, but they have done all they have done, including much abusive behavior, with the bold assertion that God has sent them out to do it. How would you express that in an “unvarnished” way?)
Distorting many facts of their history to dishonestly inflate and embellish their all-important image (another name for this is revisionism, and most tyrants and scoundrels in history have practiced it).
Damaging, or even destroying, the relationships of family, marriage, and friendship with shocking regularity.
Maliciously attacking the character and reputation of any “critics” who dare to take persistent stands even to question them, not to mention oppose them.
Maliciously denying the legitimacy and reality of other devoted Christians and churches.
Generally exploiting and manipulating people in these ways on a consistent, worldwide basis. (In other words, they may not all be the same in degree, but they are in kind.) And finally,
Refusing almost all repeated, sincere attempts, for many years, to establish reasonable dialogue re. “mistakes” that have supposedly been made (and continue to be made) by ICC leaders.
I fully realize such charges are very blunt, shocking, and, undoubtedly, offensive to many. For the therapeutic purposes I have employed them, they are intended to be all three, but they are, above all, the truth, and to almost any honest member of the ICoC, they are self-evident. Through the years, I have stressed to those with whom I’ve counseled that if these charges are trumped up or exaggerated, I am the most evil man they’ve ever met; that to dare make such harsh charges against something that is, indeed, God’s “one true modern-day movement” would have to originate from the very bowels of hell. But, I’ve further said that if even some of them are obviously and undeniably true, then there can be no way people of good faith and character can further ignore, diffuse, dilute, or equivocate such grave sins.

I submit, now, that Henry Kriete’s letter, as well as many other “letters of apology” currently being penned by leaders of the International Church of Christ, totally vindicate and affirm the legitimacy of my ten charges. That these things are systemic and endemic cannot be ignored any longer, and we stand at a crossroads (no pun intended) of choosing what to do, now, to make things better (or worse). From this point forward, we are either part of the problem, or part of the solution.

---

I think the parallels are striking, the main difference being that the ICOC was about 10000 times as large as the Geftakysassembly.

Brent

Brent, I can't thank you enough for all of your contributions when it comes to the Assembly.  However, I have to disagree with you about "forgetting" about other assemblies.  In my opinion, if only one assembly is still meeting and it still manages to destroy yet one more life, it's one life to many.   I, myself, was involved with the Norfolk Assembly for close to 3 regrettable years.  One of my closest friends was deeply affected by the "leading" of one of the LBs there and I believe is primarily response for his self-proclaimed Atheism.  I had thought that the Norfolk Assembly had disbanded.  It saddens me deeply to hear that they are still meeting.  

BTW:  If you or anyone else in the know have any updated info on Norfolk's current status, I would greatly appreciate it.  

mkoley@johnsonandassoc.com

I don't have current knowledge of Norfolk, but I understand that one or two families still meet.  Disclaimer----this information is months old, and should be verified by the buyer and his agent!----

The Norfolk group was never more than a handful of people anyways, was it?

I also don't think we should forget about any of the groups that are still meeting.  However, the goal is not just to get them to stop, or go underground, but to see them repent.  It is easy to lose heart in all of this, because, as anyone who is out of the group can tell you, it is like having the scales fall off your eyes.  

In hindsight, I am amazed at how blind I was, and how stupid and arrogant I was!  It is so obvious, looking back, at how cultic the group was, yet while I was there I was unable to discern what so many others before me had no trouble seeing.  What is so frustrating is that I still have a very hard time understanding how anyone could remain in the group, given all the undeniable, factual testimony over the years.  This, more than anything else is proof that there is a demonic fog that blinds the eyes of those that have given their allegiance to George and his system.  May God open their eyes!

Brent

Good point, thanks Brent...

There is no biblical basis for this conclusion.
Just someone who has been trained to bully you into guilt.
Focus on the love of your family and God. They love you too.

To all:

I had spoken with a Nebraskan vacationing here in So Cal, and according to this person, Norfolk was no longer meeting as an assembly.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Matt Sciaini  

You are correct.

The only assembly we suspect that is still meeting here in Nebraska is Hastings.  We have not heard otherwise.  We heard that 2-3 couples in Omaha are still gathering together but that the meeting place in Omaha is for sale.

Regarding the history of Norfolk, at one time the assembly was probably as many 40 individuals.  I can recall three different times when GG or his henchmen laid their hands on the assemby in Norfolk with the result of dwindling numbers afterwards.  This was over the time period of 1971 to 1983.  Norfolk never did very well after that time period.  The Norfolk assembly was started after GG came into town and preached about the gifts of the Spirit to a small church just starting up.  (This was GG's second visit to preach at this small church.)  The result was a split in the small church as they were still trying to wrestle with the issue.  It was during that visit in April of 1971 that my parents were saved and the assembly in Norfolk started.  The following week the assembly started meeting in my parents' home as the Steinke family (7 kids at the time) was a little too much for the Gentzler trailer home.  If anyone remembers the Gentzlers, Hap and Helen were part of the splinter group that became the Norfolk assembly.  They both remained in fellowship there until they both passed away sometime around 1992.

John

"One brother told me today that he could not have fellowship with me, because I had called the assembly a cult. It may be that the whole assembly has come
to this same conclusion, but I cannot be certain of that because my husband and kids are still talking to me.

Where is the biblical basis for this conclusion? "

Somewhere, lost in a dark misunderstanding of Truth!   Not applicable in this situation!

The Spirit of Truth is quite the optician!

Be Blessed  

now there is a quick way to clean up your social circles. just say the magic words! its nice when they make it this easy.  :)

being a sharp lady, i'm sure you are clear on the fact that you have not 'left fellowship' or 'cut off fellowship' with any of them, collectively or individually. this guy decided to 'cut off fellowship' with you completely on his own.  i got that a lot when i left - statements along the lines of "you are cutting off fellowship between us by the things you are saying and doing". not so, my cultish little friend, and i don't appreciate the mind games. i am saying and doing things, and including you in my life. you are cutting me out of your life. lets just be clear on who is responsible for what here.

anyone who does that to you is making the conscious decision to 'leave fellowship' - fellowship with you! poor people, exiling themselves to that much more darkness...

Thanks for all of your updated information on Norfolk.  I appreciate it.  Oh, BTW, for all of you novices outside the Midwest, it's pronounced (Nor-fork), not (Nor-folk).  

John:  I have heard some negative and degratory comments about you in the past.  How you had "fallin away" and you're know "worldly".  I would like to hear your perspective in the Norfolk Assembly in general.  If you'd like, you can e-mail me at the address listed below.

mkoley@johnsonandassoc.com

Thanks again for all of your contributions,
Mark

Here is a tally of Geftakys groups that have stopped meeting:

Madison, WI
Providence, RI
Norfolk, NE
Omaha, NE (for all intents and purposes)
Champaign, IL
San Diego, CA
Huntington Beach, CA
San Luis Obispo, CA

From what I've heard, Riverside is down to one family.
Can anyone verify what is now happening in Placentia, West LA or Long Beach?  Also, can anyone provide answers to the questions in my post of a few days ago?

mithrandir

FYI. Champaign is also pretty much down to one family, one couple who travels here from another small town, and one single woman.  At first, it looked like the the shop was closing, but it didn't. Too bad. :(

The Assembly here in Canoga Park, Ca. is down to one man, two dogs and a canary. I will be preaching on the importnce of fiber in the canine diet this Sunday. Head coverings are optional.

Mithrandir- I think I answered your question a few days ago about the assembly in Annandale, VA, but just in case you missed it I'll repeat.  It consists of four leading brothers, all former workers, and their families, and two other families, & one of those is only here on a temporary duty military assignment.  Everyone else voted with their feet as to the health of this particular gathering, and left.  Approx. 17 of us, including kids.

Joe, our dog says he draws the line at the bandana we put around his neck on holidays, but he wishes you all the best.  His name is Gimli.

Becky

Thanks, Becky.  I also see that you've "read the books," and not merely "seen the movies."  If you get a cat, you might name him Legolas! ;D

But seriously, folks... I have one last question before I make use of your responses.  Does anyone know of any groups which are still trying aggressively to recruit new members (recruiting includes such things as campus ministry)?

mithrandir

If they consider themselves as churches raised up from the Lord, then why wouldn't they be?

MM

Re: assemblies no longer meeting

Spokane, WA is also no longer meeting

And, as for Placentia....

There are still, to the best of my knowledge, half a dozen families and about as many singles meeting together.

As for West LA, according to the latest, it is pretty much, to quote a few "business as usual".  They are not receiving George, but neither has anyone stepped down from leadership, and only a couple of families and a few singles have left.

If anybody knows more, or if I am wrong on any point, please contribute.

Pat and all:

Also, regarding Long Beach, it was never REALLY an "assembly" to begin with, just always an outreach from Huntington Beach.  After the "event" they were supposedly breaking bread together--whether it actually happened or is still happening, I don't know.  

Anybody else know more???

Matt Sciaini

Nothing happening there anymore.

One last (or maybe not) question I have is this: the Geftakys groups are explicitly mentioned in "Churches that Abuse" by Enroth.  Are there any other books about aberrant groups that mention the Geftakys groups by name?  This would be good to know in case we need to warn outsiders about any of the existing assemblies.

mithrandir

One brother who remains in fellowship in an existing assembly X, continues to maintain contact with others who have left fellowship.  The leadership has 'advised' the brother to sever his contact with those who have left. AND those in another assembly Z have been 'advised' not to interfere with this matter as it is not Z's business; it is X's family matter.

Personally, I disagree with the leadership in both assemblies, but I am sometimes 'confused' about biblical principles. Maybe, someone(s) can enlighten me.

Since I am 'out' of the local assembly, this BB has become my new place of fellowship and seeking advice. Even, when I start going to a local church, I intend to maintain my friendships on this BB.

Thanks and Lord bless,
Marcia

Hi Marcia!

I'm a little confused... (I admit I'm trying to figure out the x'es and z's)   ;)

But I think it's fine that the still-in- brother has contact with those who have left.  The pursuing "involvement" is typical Assembly over-zealousness/ twisted behaviour.

Do you realize that in a healthy, believing, grace-filled church, your "family in Christ" doesn't a) monitor/track your social life, b) be so presumptuous as to dictate who you can and cannot interact with, or c) tell other people what to do about it either!  It's just so twisted!  

"Biblical principal?" --- it's another example of the Assembly using scripture to divide and abuse.  The Lord Jesus spent time with tax collectors, zealots and the like!  The Pharisees definitely looked down upon it, but He did it anyway.  

The Assembly relied so heavily on the Law (legalism) because it didn't trust God enough to guide His own, it sent "Leading Brothers" to control our lives instead.  Good grief.  Counsel is one thing, assembly-type involvement in one's life is quite another.  It can eventually leave one without faith, because you're constantly being told what to do, instead of going forward in faith, with the Lord as your guide and companion.

The grace-full Christian would not survive in the Assembly.  They'd be deemed "Too liberal!".

ON another note, I just finished reading "What's So Amazing About Grace?" by Phillip Yancy.  What a superb book.  I highly recommend it, even if you only read  the chapter "Grace Avoidance" (it's all about legalism).

Anyhow...
The behaviour you described is what we need to flee from!  Nothing has changed in that Assembly.

Hello Marcia,

Based on a Christian world view, most of the stuff you mentioned would not necessarily be the business of others...BUT  (And this is one BIG BUT), we are talking about the Assembly System here.   Knowing what many of us know or have learned about the control and abuse of this system, this information reveals a business as usual, approach.   Sounds to me that these leaders have not dealt with the fact that they were under an abusive system or worse yet, they know and want it to continue.

If this person does not take the *advice* of the leadership...whaddya think...will they be shunned?  Entreated?...mocked?   Or most likely be the subject of some *private* conversations to discredit them.

you said:
"One brother who remains in fellowship in an existing assembly X, continues to maintain contact with others who have left fellowship.  The leadership has
'advised' the brother to sever his contact with those who have left."

What if a current member has family members who have left?   Seems to me that this group are well on their way to marketing that nasty old wine.

you said:
" AND those in another assembly Z have been 'advised' not to interfere with this matter
as it is not Z's business; it is X's family matter."

Again, under normal circumstances, I'd agree with this...but...(SEE BIG BUT ABOVE)

"Personally, I disagree with the leadership in both assemblies, but I am sometimes 'confused' about biblical principles. Maybe, someone(s) can enlighten"

Marcia, that was a little but.   You know more about this situation thanmost on the BBS could...you probably have a good grasp on what is right or wrong with this issue.

Hmmm, It is clear that X and Z are not able to C that all S not O K.   Since U  C that L S not O K, U may B N a position to light a candle so that may be someone will C.

I hope this helps...I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you are asking what to do about X and Z...my answer would be L F I Know!

Be Blessed  
P.S.  I abhore the phrase "out of fellowship!"

Sister,

Here is a very relevant thread regarding "seeking advice/seeking counsel":  http://www.briantucker.net/bb/index.php?board=6;action=display;threadid=211

Thanks Will. I read the article that you mentioned. I agree with it.  Since January, LBs are attempting to change the way they counsel.  However old habits are difficult to root out, and therefore there is still a strong tendency to control via pressure (in assembly X), or 'convincing' words (in assembly Z).

Apparently 6 weeks is long enough to develop new habit patterns such that those who take the 6 weeks challenge do not return to their former assembly environment (generally speaking of course) because they develop new habits of meeting.

However, when it comes to behaviorial habit patterns, 6 months has not been long enough to develop new habit patterns.

So on and so forth. et. etc. etc.

Marcia

The record will clearly show that one of the primary weapons in the arsenal of George Geftakys and his enablers was the destruction of biological family ties. The numer of families sundered by this so-called ministry is rather startling. It was a deliberate strategy to pit husband against wife, brother against sister, children against parents, parents against children...all for the purpose of maintaining absolute control...many willingly complied and paid a fearful price...
Verne

This is to inform you all that I have just e-mailed the following warning to the Rick Ross website and to the Geftakysassembly website.  I have asked the webmasters to prominently post this on their websites.  If you can think of any other websites where it shoud be posted, please speak up.

Here it is:

Advisory Concerning Geftakys Assemblies that Still Exist

 
Regarding cults and cultic groups, there is one group that has recently undergone a major shake-up, the details of which can be read about below.  The Assemblies of George Geftakys are a group of aberrant churches founded by Mr. Geftakys over the last thirty years.  George Geftakys advertised these groups as “simple New Testament gatherings where we seek simply to obey the Scriptures,” but they have proven to be merely part of a religious empire, which George built for his own personal agenda.  George exercised rigid control of these groups, both personally and by means of assistant leaders whom he appointed, and he used this control to abuse and take advantage of many members.  This is well documented in the books “Churches that Abuse” and “Recovering from Churches that Abuse,” by Ronald Enroth, and on cult-monitoring websites such as www.geftakysassembly.com and www.rickross.com, where there is much more information posted concerning George Geftakys and his assemblies.

Between November of 2002 and January of 2003, it was discovered that one of George’s sons had been regularly abusing his wife, and that George himself, in addition to having covered up his son’s abuse for years, had been involved in immoral relationships which he forced between himself and several women in his assemblies.  This behavior was discovered to have been ongoing for over two decades.  Because of these things, some of the leaders of the Geftakys groups actually expelled George from his own organization, and many of the groups disbanded.  However, some of the assemblies started by George still exist and are trying to continue as churches.  This advisory is written for the purpose of giving you, the reader, the information you need to respond intelligently if you or your son, daughter or other relative is invited to come to one of the church meetings or to join one of the assemblies which used to be affiliated with George Geftakys.

 The assemblies that still exist are in the following locations:

    * Fullerton, CA (Sunday, Tuesday night and Wednesday night meetings at the Fullerton Senior Citizen’s Center).  The Fullerton assembly has renounced George, but George’s son Timothy Geftakys still exerts considerable influence in this group.
    * Placentia, CA (Sunday meetings at the Placentia Round Table, and Wednesday night and Thursday night meetings at 619 Shady Lane in Placentia).  The leaders are Jack Hanson, Sterling Bennett, and Ron Womack, all long-time associates of George Geftakys.
    * West Los Angeles, CA.  This group continued to allow visits by George Geftakys until recently.  It is led by Bill Bradbury, Greg Brislawn, Mark Geiger and Selvin Sotelo, all long-time associates of George.  Mr. Bradbury is also very close to Timothy Geftakys.
    * Riverside, CA.  This group, although consisting of only one family and a few individuals, continues to allow George Geftakys to visit and preach, in spite of the irrefutable evidence of his criminal conduct.  This group is led by Mike Almanzor, a long-time associate of George’s.
    * Goleta, CA.  This group has renounced George and refuses to have anything to do with him.  The leaders are Wes Cohen, Mike Struven, and Randy Verhoeff.  Wes and Mike are long-time associates of George Geftakys.
    * San Francisco, CA.  The leader here is Scott Testa, and his second in command is Jim Karditzas.  Both men lived in George’s home and were personally trained by him.
    * Sacramento, CA.  The Sacramento group is led by Dan Mattson-Bose and Carlos DeLeon, who report to Scott Testa.
    * Hastings, NE.  The leader is Dave Zach, whose family has been closely tied to the Geftakys group for many years.
    * Seattle, WA.  This group, led by Mike Glesesner and Russ Pittman, has renounced George Geftakys, and is trying to reform somewhat.  They are tiny in number, essentially two families.
    * Pasadena, CA.  This group is led by Jim McCallister, who co-led the San Francisco group, along with Scott Testa.  Jim also lived in George’s home, and was personally trained by him.

As mentioned above, some of these groups – namely, in Fullerton, Goleta and Seattle – have completely renounced George, and are trying to overcome the effects that George’s influence has had on them. The situation is in flux at present, and more progress may occur with these groups. They are openly and honestly discussing the things that were wrong with their assemblies and are trying to fix them.  They are hoping that by this they might have a new beginning as churches.  A new beginning may or may not be possible; however, if you or someone you know is invited to attend their meetings, it would probably be safe to attend if you choose to do so – provided that you keep your eyes open.  Yet know this – a new beginning will take a tremendous investment of time, energy and above all, honesty on the part everyone involved.

It is a different story with the assemblies in San Francisco, Riverside, Sacramento, and Pasadena. Their leaders still allow George’s influence and teaching, and they discourage their members from asking questions or finding out the truth about these groups.  Their leaders still exercise rigid control over their members.  This includes the practice of setting up communal ‘training homes’, also called ‘brothers’ and sisters’ houses’ where inductees are ‘trained’ to serve the group.  If you or someone you know has been invited into one of these assemblies, you should know that these are dangerous groups where intense cultic training takes place.  It is extremely likely that someone joining one of these assemblies would experience some form of abuse.

The assemblies in Placentia and West Los Angeles deserve special mention.  Their leaders have publicly renounced George, but they are unwilling to publicly discuss the history of their assemblies, especially with those who have newly joined.  They are unwilling to publicly admit that they need to change anything about their groups.  The leaders still practice manipulation and excessive control of members’ lives.  The main decisions affecting these groups are still made in secret by their leaders.  Their lack of forthrightness is a very disturbing danger signal that perhaps the old abusive ways are still in place in these groups.  Placentia also has communal ‘training homes’ with college-age residents being trained to serve the group.  And both West Los Angeles and Placentia are actively reaching out to the community in an effort to recruit new members.  If you or someone you know is being invited into one of these assemblies, the leaders may try to keep you from learning the history of these groups – thus preventing you from making an informed decision.

In conclusion, the Geftakys assemblies have been clearly proven to be abusive, dysfunctional churches where many of the leaders have abused the members.  Since George Geftakys has been discredited, some of these groups are still trying to continue as churches.  In order for these groups to evolve into healthy churches, a lot of honesty is required.  As Jeff VanVonderen says in the book, “The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse,” “…the message to addicts is, ‘Get honest or die!’”  This applies to churches as well as individuals.  If a member of one of these groups invites you to a meeting or to join their assembly, you might ask him or his leader these questions:

   1. How much interaction is there between the assembly leaders and leaders of other churches?
   2. Would you be uncomfortable if I asked leaders of other churches what they think about the assembly?
   3. Do the leaders openly invite members to ask questions about the history of the assembly?
   4. Are finances handled openly, with full disclosure of spending and freely available records?

Here are some questions you might also ask yourself:

   1. Do the leaders give vague or pat answers to your questions?
   2. Do you get the feeling that if you ask certain questions regarding the history of the assembly the leaders will accuse you of being 'suspicious', or use some other means to make you feel like you just crossed an invisible line that you weren't supposed to cross?
   3. Do you sense that assembly history is a forbidden subject in the assembly (even when the leaders are not present)?

Finally, if you feel that it’s not safe to say “Yes” when someone invites you to one of these assemblies, you can always say “No!”  And saying “No” might save you a lot of grief in the long run.


This is the warning, as it will appear on the websites I mentioned if the webmasters choose to post it.  Now, as for why this warning is being broadcast, I am thankful that so much of the Geftakys machine has collapsed.  But I don't think the job is quite done as long as certain groups continue with business as usual while trying to recruit new, unsuspecting members.  Someone has to sound a warning to people at large regarding these groups.  I know this will mean collateral damage in the form of friendships lost between me and some who are still in some of these assemblies, but the time for half-measures has long passed.

Now that I've taken this step, I am going to focus on other things, at least in the short term - things like how to deal with my anger over what happened and making things right with anyone I offended.  Also, how to read the Bible and really hear what it's saying (without the Geftakys assembly spin!)

Clarence Thompson,
aka mithrandir
former doorkeeper in the Fullerton assembly

Mithrandir:

What about Fresno and Arcata?  What should people do about those assemblies?

Matthew R. Sciaini

Hi Matt,  good to see you at Dan Guskes wedding!

There is not much left of Arcata, just the Brady's and maybe another family or two and a few individuals. Most have left including Fortezzo's and Hillgers (former LB's). The Assembly in Arcata was one of the first to really try radical reform and dissassociation from George.  As time went on most began to seek the Lord and discovered you just can't put "new wine in old wine skins"

Ken C (former Seattle and now free to serve the Lord!)

Hi Clarence, aka Mithrandir! :)
  Do you remember me,  Mark Campbell from the Valley?  It has been great to read your posts'.  When did you leave the Assembly?  Did you leave recently, or did you leave before the recent GG revelations?  I would love to hear your story (if you feel like sharing it).  I left about 12 years ago.
                                   God Bless,  Mark C.

My advisory regarding existing assemblies is now on the Rick Ross website, in an edited form.  You can get to it by going to the main page at rickross.com and clicking on "An Update about the Geftakys Assemblies."  Hopefully, this will serve as a useful warning.

mithrandir

If you are wondering what to do and feel that your contribution is too small, listen:

When I first left the assembly there was no BB and no geftakys.com. I live in a small community. I started talking to people. At first it was the plumber, then the electrician and then the contractors. I started talking to people in the grocery stores and naming names. I figured this is a small town, people know other people. Especially among Christians. Take action! The worst you can say is Roberto Sanchez needs to repent and still has not made things right with me. Hold these men accountable!

You have more power than you think because you are in the truth. Don't get tired of telling people GG needs to repent. It is the truth.

Heide

The fruit? No more SLO assembly. Now it is Goleta's turn.

Amen, Heide!  And to everyone else I say, write letters to local pastors.  If you see a "campus work" start in your community, warn the campus advisor.  Get the word out! - especially regarding those who are the most dishonest, such as Placentia ans West LA.  Give names of leaders and addresses of meetings.  But proceed with caution - only state those things which are provable, in the mouth of two or three witnesses.  You don't want to damage your own credibility.

mithrandir

Also -  include in your letter a print out of some of the information from the Rick Ross and Geftakysassembly web sites.  Also, send a copy to the Christian ministries at your local campus - Campus Crusade, InterVarsity, Fellowship of Christian Athletes.

Each campus has it's own guidelines and by laws by which "clubs" have to meet in order to function on campus.  If a "club" meets the requirements then they can meet.  One of the guidelines is to have a campus faculty/staff member act as an advisor.  If you can get a hold of this person, then you can inform them of the Geftakys ministry, and then they can decide whether or not to become an advisor or to stop being an advisor.  No advisor = no recognized campus "club", no room to meet in and no setting up of "booktables" to recruit.  (I'm not against getting the Gospel out - just the recruiting to be in the Geftakys ministry.)

Any questions or comments can be posted here or emailed to publicimail@netscape.net.

The fog has lifted and I see Sonshine! Yes, Sonshine, glorious Sonshine!  Christ, my Lord, is beautiful, warm and loving!

Shirley Collins
Huntington Beach 1983 - 2003
(The former school bus driver)

Talking to the existing assemblies: It is easy to call GG the evil one and put the blame on him. But remember, your leading brothers although they may have repented are still responsible for the geftakys assembly and the part they played. Although they have repented of their personal part they have not repented for the corporate part. The history they played a part in has not been revealed. And in doing so, you current assemblies are in a dangerous area. You are still putting your trust into men who have a past history of betraying you. George is not the only culprit, those men who are still in leadership who are still leading you are still responsible. Not only currently but for past failures.

Yes, they are sinners and you are a sinner. Therefore you say, "We allow George to come here and preach because we are all sinners!" The bible makes it explicit what we are to do when someone is caught in sin and excommunicated. Read your bibles, look it up for yourself. Yes, I am talking to you San Francisco, Sacramento and San Jose. To allow George into your precious gathering and allow him to speak his deceit to your precious sheep is SIN. You are endangering the very lives of people you should supposedly be protecting. How can you call yourselves shepherds, Scott Testa and Dan Mattson-Boze?Those sheep who were paid with the high price of Christ's blood, you turn over so easily to the wolf. You are unfit as men and as fathers. Could you so easily turn your daughters over to pornogarphers? This is exactly what you are doing to your sheep in letting them hear GG. You are betraying them and luring them to their slaughter.

I also call Wes C. and Mike S. out of the Goleta assembly. How can you expect to breathe life into a dead decaying animal called the assembly? You men are not fit to lead. You have no formal training in how to handle problems with people. Other than assembly doctrine, do you even know the basis of love. It isn't self-fulfilling. It is selfless and sacrificing. Two words you did not learn in the assembly. The best thing you could do for the Goleta assembly is let those people go. It takes a great act of love. Let them follow you into a healthy Christ oriented church where the pastor is trained. Break apart those chains and come out into the light. Repent for the kingdom of God is in your face.

Heide

I ran into John D. Simone yesterday, He stated that the "Assembly" has "Fallen Apart Completely"  Does this mean that there are no longer any assemblies?  Could anyone give me a picture of what if anything has survived?  Thanks!

Check out this link for an update:

http://geftakysassembly.com/Articles/TeachingPractice/ContinueQuestion.htm

I just heard that the Assembly in Placentia is planning to have a "Concert in the Park" outreach at Tri-City Park in Placentia at the end of August.  This will be an opportunity for them to snare unsuspecting people into their group.  I intend to call the city governments responsible for issuing permits for use of Tri-City Park, and to mail them the advisory I wrote concerning existing assemblies of George Geftakys.  Would anyone care to join me in this endeavor?

mithrandir

What kind of help would you need?  I'm 4 hours away, but I'm ready to help.  I've got a wedding to shoot on Sunday 8/31, but I may be available on Sat 8/30.

I'm not sure much can be done regarding the government officials.  As evil as cults are they do have freedom of speech.  But, so do we.  We can show up and warn people.


Jack

I was informed today that Sacramento did read the letter of excommunication.  Can anyone confirm that?  We would like to be accurate in what we report on GA.com.

Hi Margaret

This is one of the problems we have had all along.  The information you put on the web is expected to be accurate, and well is should!  However, the very people you are taking pains to represent fairly won't talk to you.

I do know this:  Sacramento continued to receive George for a long time, in spite of entreaty to the contrary.  Same with San Francisco, Pasadena, West LA and Riverside.

If they have repented, it is up to them to whisper about it, or better yet write a couple terse sentences, in order to demonstrate "zealous repentance."  ;)  

Continue to do the very best you can, under the Code of Silence, and correct things when you become aware of inaccuracy.  However, unless one of the leaders, or two or three eye-witnesses describe the circumstances under which the letter of ex-communication was finally read in Sacramento, your facts are up-to-date and accurate.  It is up to them to communicate with George's former followers as to where they stand.  

Let them gripe and moan, but they are accountable to us, because we were all in this together, and participted in it in one way or another.  

If they aren't willing to talk, then they shouldn't wonder at the fact that sincere people miss a fact or two.  The very act of inquiring for correction and clarification is clear evidence that you are acting on good faith.  If they really were repenting, in the Biblical sense, then they would publicly tell the truth about where they stand.

There is an excellent article by Rob Kazarinoff on the website, regarding repentance.  I think it applies to this situation quite nicely.

Brent

I'd like to offer a bit of advice to those who want to write or send out warnings or advisories concerning the assemblies.  If you like my advice, I'll feel honored, but if you reject it, I won't feel too bad...after all, I'm just a bus driver...what do I know?

First of all, when writing a warning intended for those who have never heard of the assembly, we must focus on the things which pose the most obvious danger.  And the most obvious danger is not Assembly doctrine!  It is true that George and his gang taught many things that were wrong.  But presenting a detailed toxicological analysis of George's teaching to an outsider will not necessarily produce the desired response.  Instead, the outsider is likely to look at you with glazed eyes and say, "What on earth are you talking about?!"

There is a passage in Acts 18 which may help to illustrate this:   "When Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him to the judgment seat, saying, 'This fellow persuades men to worship God contrary to the law.' And when Paul was about to open his mouth, Gallio said to the Jews, 'If it were a matter of wrongdoing or wicked crimes, O Jews, there would be reason why I should bear with you. But if it is a question of words and names and your own law, look to it yourselves; for I do not want to be a judge of such matters.' And he drove them from the judgment seat.  Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. But Gallio took no notice of these things."

Now George isn't Paul.  Paul was a good guy.  George is a very bad man.  But there is a parallel.  You see, Gallio didn't understand or care about the Jews' doctrinal differences with Paul.  All he cared about was, "Is someone getting killed?  Has something been stolen?  Are we dealing with criminal behavior?"  

I left the Assembly in Fullerton, but not because of doctrinal differences (although I have now thrown out almost everything I was taught there and am starting from scratch).  But I left because I saw that people in high places had done some very bad things to people I knew, and I remembered some of the bad things that had been done to me.  In warning people about the Assemblies, the primary thing to emphasize is that they are abusive places where bad things are done to people.  Arguing over conditional sanctification isn't nearly as effective as telling people that George hid his son's wife abuse and refused to deal with it, or that George picked leaders who for a long time refused to stand up to him, or that money was collected from the Lord's people and the leaders refused to give a public account of how it was spent, or that leaders of some assemblies are lying to newcomers and refusing to tell them the history of their assemblies and how they got started, or...you fill in the blanks.

mithrandir

Greetings mithrandir:

I think you give some sound advice. My main focus when dealing by internet w/ various campuses was to compare the assembly with the the International Church of Christ ( Boston Movement-Kip McKean ), since there were some definite similarities and lot of info out there about them. We need to write to our audience to be most effective, just as you are suggesting. The doctrinal issues may not resonate with everyone, but emotional abuse and manipulation will always get the attention of those of goodwill.

Here's a quick update re. Southern California:

Placentia Concert in the Park: I checked with the City of Placentia regarding upcoming events at Tri-City Park, and they have no record of any private groups reserving the park for an upcoming concert in August or September.  This may not mean anything, since reservations are only required if someone is playing amplified music.  But if the Placentia assembly is still going to do a "Concert in the Park" (or should I say, "Concert in the Dark"), it will be more low-key than they usually have been.  I will try to find out more information.

Fullerton Assembly: The Fullerton assembly seems to be rapidly disintegrating.  Many even of the Hispanic brethren have left.  Also, two ex-leading brothers and their families recently left.  I don't have hard and fast numbers, but it seems like just a matter of time before Fullerton comes to an end.

Tim G: One interesting note: I have received reports from two people that Tim Geftakys has been getting more involved with the Placentia assembly.  I don't yet know for sure what this means, but I am investigating.

Does anyone else have verifiable information regarding Fullerton and Placentia?

mithrandir

Those old wine skins are so full of holes, that there is a lot of patchwork proposed/happening.

There's none so blind as those who will NOT see.

Marcia

For all those interested in the Annandale VA assembly, it now consists of the Taylors, Zorns, Kruses, and Dass', all former workers, remaining in leadership, still united, standing together, along with one other family, the Bennetts.

I will refrain from fruther comment, because those of you who know us can draw your own conclusions.

Phill

Poor Bennetts!  When there is a leading brothers' meeting, the whole church is there, except for the Bennetts! That's gotta feel strange!

Providence was like that too.  The Assembly was the Knox's, Spivey's, Hine's, Jarrell's, who were all leaders and workers.  Then there was a sister named Yvonne, who wasn't.

One thing the Assembly can definitely boast in, they have the best leadership to member ratio of any church around! ;D

Brent

A friend and I figured this out for an assembly saga trilogy:

The Great Deception
The Website Strikes Back
The Return of the Great Deceiver

MM

On the other hand, the Bennetts will be ready for glory four times faster than any of us.  :) They have four shepherds to 'minister' to them, and deal with their 'problems'. What a privilege! ;)

Marcia

I thought of this thread when I read the following quote in a (fiction) library book last night.  A pastor named Daniel is on leave from his church trying to rediscover his first love for Christ.  His son is Tyler.

' Then of course there was Tyler's accusation. " All religion cares about is being in charge." In one sense he had a point.  Daniel wasn't sure when it had happened, but somehow it had crept in, this greater concern for maintaining the machine than for serving the people.  And if that was true, then how did it make him any different from the Pharisees and Saducees?'


Sounds like fictional Daniel is getting honest and may be on the road to recovery.

BW

Thinking of the LOTR trilogy, I don't see much of a parallel between Sauron and GG.

GG is more like Saruman.  He imagined himself immensely powerful, but was only a puppet.

Remember in the chapter, "The Cleansing of the Shire", where Saruman is only a shadow of his former self, and Grima Wormtongue is his only follower.

That's what GG has become.  This is so sad.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

More like Star Wars than LOTR; but those are neat observations.  What was GG's former self? :)

Lord bless,
Marcia (may the Force be with you) :)

2CO 7:11 For behold what earnestness this very thing, this godly sorrow, has produced in you: what vindication of yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what avenging of wrong! In everything you demonstrated yourselves to be innocent in the matter.

Existing Assemblies, recognize the signs of Geftakysism still in your midst. In your 'claim' to repentace from Geftakysism you have not 'demonstrated yourselves to be innocent in the matter'.

1. LBs cannot make decisions without calling on each other to ensure that they 'all say the same thing'.
In Acts 10 we see a different picture. God told Peter to go to Cornelius' home. Peter obeyed. he did NOT consult with the rest of the brethren, because after all Cornelius might be a Roman spy and try and convince Peter to reveal some names of believers (or something like that).

2. LBs cannot change their minds once they have voiced a decision. Their thinking is that it may weaken their stand as LBs before the saints. So they give you the 'silent' treatment UNLESS it is to clarify a mis-understanding about themselves.
In Acts 11 we see a different picture. The brethren 'took issue' with Peter, but they listened to him and they changed their minds and glorified God even though God was not 'toeing the party line' (I hope that this is the correct expression). I tend to say things like 'wake up and smell the roses' and 'stop and smell the coffee'. :)

3. LBs have not said "I was wrong" when asked about their past involvement and promotion of Geftakysism. E.g. Tim G knew about David G's abuse before GG's excommunication. When he talked to his dad about it, he got the 'party line' ie. "It's a local issue, don't interfere." Possibly TG took his dad's advice and did not interfere. Has TG  ever said that he now realizes that he was wrong for not interfering and for not standing for what was right? This would be a true indication of repentance from Geftakysism. Maybe TG has, maybe TG hasn't. How many of the LBs/ex-LBs out there have actually boldly and publicly stated that they were wrong. Some have, but only a few. E.g. some LBs are still promoting the "It's a local issue, don't interfere" mentality.

4. The chief-LBs wife is controlling the assembly like BG did. This happens via a number of tactics. Prayer-preaching is one of them, where the LBW actually preaches with her head-covering on via her prayers. Another is the 'holy voice' method; when she wants to 'control' a situation she puts on a voice that is 'smoothing' and 'mesmerizing' (or something like that). Another is the 'acquiring of "wisdom"', but a lack of understanding (Pro 4:7 "The beginning of wisdom is: Acquire wisdom; And with all your acquiring, get understanding.) The LBW is in the 'know' and is the authority. Do you see shades of BG (eau-de-BG) in your midst? Beware!! And there's more, but I will quit here.

Marcia,

You're on a roll.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

Yes Marcia----- Please roll on! :)
   I agree with Tom!  Marcia, you have shared some vivid insights into the subtle power of Geftakys abuse.  I think the most obvious revelation from your last post is the dishonest nature of these defenders of their own place and power in exisiting Assemblies.
   The greatest fear of the Jewish leaders during Christ's time was that the Romans might come and take "their place" from them.  These leaders of the Jews did not care about the sheep of Israel, the truth of God, God himself, or God's "testimony" among them; all they cared about was their "place" of leadership in the exisiting religious structure of the day.
   There were some leaders whose consciences did bother them and this eventually led to their turning away from preservation of their place to a true relationship with Christ (Nicodemus would be one example of this).  I think we can find some former leaders of Geftakysism who also fit this category, but precious few from the recent fall out.  Each situation is different, but it would seem that those who stayed to the bitter end are more apt to hardness of heart then those who "saw the light" prior to the final days.
   I was talking with an ExAssemblyite the other day and he wondered at one brother who was trying to continue meeting Geftays lite.  His wonder was at the lack of perception that the would be renovator of Geftakysism was showing, as his own children hated the Assembly meetings and they, as he put it, should have been the "canaries in the mine" to warn him re. the lack of spiritual oxygen in the group.
   It is truly remarkable the utter darkness that some Valley leaders expressed in their leaving the group.  They have refused contact with former members and only associate with themselves.  To this day they have made no effort at an apology to, or concern for, the former members; on the contrary, they have blamed some of the former members for the group's demise and expressed harsh rejection of those seeking to win back their affections (I do not approve of such grovelling, but the point is even such action was was met with disdain by the former leaders! >:()
   Not only did the former Jewish leaders who sought to protect their position of power lose their "place" they also lost their souls!  I can not judge the eternal state of these men, but if such a warning doesn't at least cause a stir in the conscience what does it say about them?!  If it is indeed Christ who is seeking to knock at the door of their meetings and they refuse to respond what can that mean?
   I appeal to any Leader of a Geftays founded group to not lock out a rational discussion of these issues and  entreat them to a willingness for honest conversation.  If indeed you desire to love and serve Christ don't grieve the Holy Spirit by putting your position in the group above Christ's position in your life and a desire to bless others whom you alledge to serve.
                              God Bless,   Mark C.

Marcia,
Not only are you on a roll, you are seeing with extreme clarity.
Your point # 4 especially got me.  I've been across the table from those of the "smooth" voice, and found myself nodding right along with them.  Rather like the intended victims of the snake in The Jungle Book.
May God cause many more to 'wake up and smell the coffee', or the eau-de-whatever else is being wafted around their particular gathering.
Becky

Marcia,

There is a nagging part of me that wishes this weren't true...




...But, then there is a clarity of thought that recognizes that you are seeing things as they are!

Listen to the Truth people!   And, listen to that rumble...a big crash is coming and you don't want to be part of it.   There are worse things to come.

 You cannot pat yourself on the back for sustaining afalse and destructive testimony, because you won't be able to take the hand of those who are trying to pull you out of the ashes!

God Bless you Marcia, I certainly hope that someone in Ottawa is listening.

Tony

The Valley assembly must have been an awfully bleak place.  I missed it since I left shortly before it started.  My impression is that a harsh and unforgiving attitude must have been an intrinsic part of the culture of the Valley assembly and was not limited to the leaders.

Things have been very hot in Fullerton and Placentia lately!  It is time I filled you all in on recent events.

Placentia Concert in the Park  I kept hearing rumors of the Placentia assembly planning to host a "Concert in the Dark (oops, I meant Park)" outreach in September.  One person I talked to suggested that I call someone who is still in fellowship in Placentia to find out the exact truth.  (BTW, there are only five families left in Placentia, although I hear that there are a lot of young people.)

So I called a family whose name I will not reveal here.  The wife answered the phone.  I said, "Say, is Placentia having a 'Concert in the Park' outreach?"  Her answer: "Why do you want to know?"  I said, "I was just curious."  Again, she said, "Why do you want to know?"  Eventually I got hold of her husband, who also asked why I wanted to know, and then proceeded to tell me that I had a reputation as a person who was trying to stop the Placentia assembly.  I asked him three questions:

Do you tell new people and visitors the history of your assembly, and of your involvement with George Geftakys?  His answer: "Inappropriate question!"

Do you all have meetings where you openly discuss what happens with the finances you collect?  His answer: "Inappropriate question!"

Does each member of your assembly have a say in deciding the direction of the assembly?  Again, his answer: "Inappropriate question!" ::)

I told him that he had just answered all my questions and hung up.  He then called Ron Womack, who is one of the leaders in Placentia.  Ron called me and asked if we could get together sometime.  We decided tentatively to get together on Labor Day.  But I wanted Tom Maddux to join us, and Tom was willing to come along.  When I told Ron that Tom would be there, Ron said, "Oh, no, I just want to talk to you.  I don't see what Tom has to do with Placentia...and I don't want to get ganged-up-on."  (The actual expression he used was more graphic.)  I told him he could bring Jack Hanson or Sterling Bennett if he wanted to (they are the other leaders in Placentia), but he declined.  I proceeded to tell him what my concerns were with Placentia trying to recruit new people into a dysfunctional and abusive gathering, and I asked him the same three questions I mentioned earlier.  His response: "Who are you to tell us how to gather?  Get a life!"  In summary, he refused to meet with both me and Tom Maddux.

My response to all this  When Brent's website first became known to all of us, I was quite glad that we were finally getting to see the truth about the Geftakys assembly system.  I was glad that people in high places were finally being exposed as the corrupt individuals they were.  But I kept wondering when Placentia would show up on the radar, and when Jack Hanson in particular would be exposed.  I must now confess that because I didn't speak up when the time was ripe, a major chance for justice was missed.

As I thought about what was happening in Placentia and what to do about it, I was led to post a warning about existing assemblies on the Rick Ross website.  But I probably would have stopped at that had it not been for the conversations described above which I had with Ron Womack and the other family in Placentia.  These conversations pushed me over the edge into more drastic action.  So I typed a "Warning concerning the Assemblies of George Geftakys", which reads, "The Assemblies of George Geftakys are a dangerous cultic religious group.  To find out about their current status, please log on to www.rickross.com, and type 'geftakys' in the search box.  Or, please read the attached advisory."  The advisory I attached is the same one I posted on this thread at the beginning of August, with additional information about the Geftakys campus ministry.

I left these advisories in post offices, laundromat bulletin boards, libraries, and Internet cafe's in both Fullerton and Placentia.  I left some of these advisories at church offices with church staffs at churches in Placentia (including the church right next to the Placentia Round Table, where the assembly meets).  And today I left advisories at the offices of the faculty advisors for Campus Crusade for Christ at Fullerton College and Cal State Fullerton.

This has been a major step for me - necessary, but very stressful.  This is moreover probably the last step of this kind that I will take, unless someone from Fullerton or Placentia comes to me for advice about leaving these groups.

How to look at Placentia  I can't tell anyone else what to think, but I can give my opinion, based on what I know so far:

1. The Placentia leaders, headed by Jack Hanson, have clearly been dishonest in their handling of the excommunication of George Geftakys.  In particular, they have withheld as much information as possible from their "flock", in order to prevent the sort of necessary fresh look at things and re-evaluation which has led many to leave the Geftakys assemblies over the last seven months.

2.  The Placentia assembly is a controlling, abusive, unhealthy place where the controlling, manipulative ways of Geftakysism are still deeply at home.  Jack Hanson in particular is a man who will tolerate no peers.  In my opinion, he does not feel successful unless he dominates all who are around him.  And he does not feel like a success as a parent unless his kids dominate all their peers.  Jack has been the source of much abuse and heavy-handed treatment of people in Placentia.  One sister who lived in his home for years mentioned to me some of the abuse she suffered there.  And since she knew I had been in Jack's band New Song (which is now defunct ;D) she said to me, "I can't figure how you lasted so long in New Song.  It must have been hell for you!"  Believe me, it was!

3.  How to pray for Placentia: I think we need to pray that God bring that assembly to a swift end.  We need to pray that the people there would be led to find healthy churches where they may be recovered.  And we need to pray even for the leaders, for Jack and Ron and Sterling, that God would recover them.  Why do I say this?  Jack and his wife Linda have been very abusive toward me, and if I needed it, I could find good reason to hate them.  But I read the last chapter of "The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse" recently.  That chapter is addressed to the perpetrators of abuse.  Instead of being full of woe and damnation, it is a very gracious appeal to them to find healing also.  And in "Churches that Abuse," there is the story of a man who found after he escaped from a cult that the road to healing for him lay in forgiving those who had hurt him.  Note: This in no way invalidates the guilt of these men or the need on our part to warn others of them, unless they repent.

Lastly, please pray for me as I will surely pray for all of you, that the Lord would grant us grace and health to "drive off into the sunset" and begin to enjoy the rest of our lives.  May your drive be pleasant!

Clarence Thompson
aka mithrandir

Before I left the local assembly here, I wanted to meet with the LBs individually, but was unable to do so, because 'the rule' (for lack of a different word) was that I had to meet with the LBs together. Maybe it has something to do with convincing the other to seeing your point of view which would be easier to do if it was one on one. ???
You've been busy.
From what I have heard, Anandale is very similar to Placentia, though they are across the continent from each other. How is this possible unless they had the same 'dictator' ruling them? Looks like they were excellent disciples.

The sentiment here is that anyone who reads the website and BB leaves fellowship, so the saints have been discouraged from viewing the BB/GA.com. So on Sunday I sent emails to those I had email-addresses for and told them to make up their own minds and gave them the website and BB addresses.

It is very difficult to make a stand against those you have stood with for 20+ years, so I can understand that it would be stressful. The gathering here is infected with Geftakysism, but the people are nice, which makes it doubly difficult.

Lord bless
Marcia

Wow, Clarence!  Way to go!

The leaders hold the followers accountable for lots of things, but I guess it only works one way.

These leaders had no qualms about ganging up against one inquisitive 'saint' in secret meetings, but they fear facing more than one (especially when one of them has been out from under their thumbs for a long time).

Jack

Clarence,

I respect your courage in shining the Light into the darkness.

you wrote:
"I told him that he had just answered all my questions and hung up.  He then called Ron Womack, who is one of the leaders in Placentia.  Ron called me and
asked if we could get together sometime.  We decided tentatively to get together on Labor Day.  But I wanted Tom Maddux to join us, and Tom was willing
to come along.  When I told Ron that Tom would be there, Ron said, "Oh, no, I just want to talk to you.  I don't see what Tom has to do with Placentia...and
I don't want to get ganged-up-on."  (The actual expression he used was more graphic.)  I told him he could bring Jack Hanson or Sterling Bennett if he
wanted to (they are the other leaders in Placentia), but he declined.  I proceeded to tell him what my concerns were with Placentia trying to recruit new
people into a dysfunctional and abusive gathering, and I asked him the same three questions I mentioned earlier.  His response: "Who are you to tell us
how to gather?  Get a life!"  In summary, he refused to meet with both me and Tom Maddux."

Sounds to me that some cowards wanted an opportunity to pump themselves up...Boy!  That Tom is a scarey guy!  And the "...get a life..."  sounds like the response of a mature leader!   Maybe instead of bringing Tom, you could bring a couple of 10 year old girls with a year's worth of memory verses.   That should make them tremble.

No offense ment to Tom here.   I had the opportunity to meet him this summer and it was not scarey at all.   In fact, it was a pleasure.  He didn't even laugh at my work bench assembling efforts.

God Bless, Tony Edwards

Very well said and very well done Clarence!! :)

   God has been so merciful to our former associates in the Assembly who wish to try keep the old system going.
 
    Would Clarence be justified in just forgetting the whole bunch and letting them face the Lord without warning?  Of course he would, and he could just ride off into the sunset (as he said) and let them pursue their ambitions.

     It is not bitterness or revenge that motivates Clarence, or others, who continue with this bb and other avenues of entreaty, but a hope that these folks might find repentance and recovery. ( I say this because that is often the charge against those who zealously desire to see justice done and the truth spoken.  As Clarence said, forgiveness is not turning a blind eye toward justice, truth, acknowledgment of sin, and of repentance from same)
   Paul and Jesus were very strident in their condemnation of the Pharisaical religious crowd, and yet Jesus wept for Jerusalem and Paul said he would be willing to lose salvation that his former associates in his Jewish religion might be saved.
   There would be those who would say Clarence was too strident in his actions, but I think he has the attitude of Jesus that says I love you enough to tell you the truth.
   There is also the attitude that says, "I don't want any other poor little one's to get mixed up in the hellish machinations of Geftakysism as I did."  Love is truth in action and I believe God will honor Clarence and all those who take similar steps in outreach to our former friends.  It may take some years for these things to sink in, but it will be worth it all if even one of these former abusers sees the light and turns to Christ in repentance.
       Thank you Clarence for your example and God Bless,
                                                        Mark C.

Thanks so much, Clarence, for your personal sacrifice and for doing something about your rightful anger.  I personally witnessed Jack's treatment of you in New Song and others.  I am so glad you are free.  Thank you for caring for others enough to seek to stop the cycle.

I am writing to people in WLA and Riverside.  Even if they reject us today, down the road they will remember our care.  Look at Dave Sable and others who always left the door open for us!

Clarence,
Good job, and good post telling everyone.  I have to ask, What do these leaders think an "appropriate" question would be??
The problem is, they have no answers other than the truth, and it's too embarassing at this point to just say that.  :-[
Maybe I'll attempt to answer for them.
"No, we're not accounting for the money, no, of course we can't tell anyone about our history, and no, the people don't have any real say here because we might lose our places of authority".
Anyway, I'm glad you asked and let the answers they gave speak for themselves.
Becky

Four further observations:

1.  Al Hartman sent me a message thanking me for my recent post and emphasized what I said about forgiveness.  I just want to clarify this.  I do believe in forgiveness and showing mercy to enemies.  However, if the Geftakys leaders continue to pose a danger to others, we must still treat them as dangerous.  This means exposing their evil deeds and sounding a warning to others.

2.  It has been reported to me by several people that Tim Geftakys is getting more involved in Placentia, including doing things with the young people on Sunday afternoons.  :o

3.  Now that New Song has disbanded, I don't know what Placentia will do for it's "Concert in the Dark."  But I'm sure Jack has it all figured out.  BTW, the Concert will probably be at Tri-City Park tomorrow or next Friday.

4.  The school property where Cornerstone used to be is in escrow.  My question to the leaders and handlers of the money is, What do you intend to do with the money?  It's not that I want any of it (although I'm sure that the money used to buy the Cornerstone school site came from all our gifts and offerings).  But I don't think you leaders are to be trusted with it.  By all means, give it to charity and let us see you giving it to charity in a way that can be clearly traced!  Don't give us just one more reason to be disgusted by you...

mithrandir

Clarence,

It is my understanding, (such as it is) that in a California non-profit corportation with tax exemption that all assets must be liquidated and turned over to other non-profits.

However, there may be a way to lawyer one's way through this...setting up your own "ministry" or whatever.

I am pretty sure that all these transactions must be a matter of public record.

Tom M.

So...is it true then that Cornerstone (Christian Heritage) is no longer in existence?  Why did it go out of business (so to speak)?

No students=no money.
Smaller Assembly=no money

If they mixed Assembly money and school money, they are in big trouble.  


Brent

I want my money back so I can go buy enough food to become obese like Tim Geftakys; and enough car parts to open a small junk yard like his brother....

Actually, a new set of very nice tires would amount to the money I was suckered out of, and I'm grateful that it wasn't more.   But even if it were, say my life savings or more, I'd still be grateful that at least I got out alive.  I wonder how many people ended up killing themselves as a result of their involvement in the Geftakys Cult.  What a testimony of GG: to have organized a death trap for some Christians.  

Perhaps the existing assemblies should add a warning in their invitations to their Bible studies that some of those who get involved may experience premature death.

Anyway, in an attempt to end this with a cheerful thought, here's a smiley face:  :)

Could you expand on this?

Sure can!

If I give money for Tim's trip to Europe, and it is actually spent on a new desk for Ginger over at Cornerstone, this is considered illegal and improper use of donations.  Another example, if I give money to a leading brother, who is going administer the money in order to help a sick brother, but he gives it to George instead---big problem.

If I give money to Cornerstone, allegedly for tuition, and it is used to buy Ginger a car (sure, it's The Lord's car, but only Ginger drives it) big trouble.

If I give a tithe and put it in the box on the back table for that purpose, and my tithe goes to a business, Cornerstone----big trouble.  Serious big trouble.

First of all, George claimed that the Assembly wasn't a business----actually it was 3 businesses, but that's another story.   George claims that the money he took was all a gift to him.  So's if give him gifts, see?  And then he gives my gift to Cornerstone, then I'm not really giving him a gift, he is giving a gift.

Is this salary?  Has he accounted for all of this?  Where is the money?  Are the books being kept in a manner befitting a church?  We don't know

Perhaps the IRS will want to know.  I do know, for a fact, that it is illegal to mix funds in a church.  Money given to the "building fund," must be used for the same.  It can't be spent on plastic trees to spruce up the front of the sanctuary.  Money given for the youth group's trip to Barstow can't be used to buy an X-Box for the pastor, etc.

All of this applies to the Assembly, regardless of what George says about the church not being a business.

Brent

I post this at the request of another. Please comment.

I still think that, when Christians choose to meet together to serve the Lord from an honest desire to glorify Him, He will bless and provide for His people. The attitude of the people is paramount. I do not see how an association with someone like GG can change that.

On the other hand, I begin to see how some harmfull teaching may remain after the man leaves. I understand that you (plural) believe that it is impossible to distinguish between truth and error but I am not yet convinced that we must seek outside help (beside the books, tapes, and lectures we are using now, more than before).

Marcia

Right on Brent!  I had completely forgot about Cornerstone.  No doubt they mingled assembly/school finances.

At some point, people in denial are going to see the light and realize that the assembly hierarchy was involved in more illegal than legal activities...The problem though is that it is just really hard to prove all of this stuff.  The IRS is so backlogged as it is, that if one can't give enough credible evidence regarding a situation, they aren't going to put it anywhere near the top of their priority list.

Time to open up another can of worms...The assembly hierarchy made it a practice to cover up spousal abuse, adultery, financial matters,etc...What about cases of sexual abuse?  I know for a fact that around 1985/86  there was a case of a middle aged man in the Omaha assembly whose behaviour was completely innapropriate towards a 12 year old boy.  The 12 year old was coming out to the meetings by himself...He was from a very rough background - his father was not in the picture and he was the oldest of 4-5 siblings.  He was easy prey for this middle aged man.  This middle aged man would call him constantly and invite him over to spend the night and make references that they would share a bed...This situation came to a head at an outreach one Sunday afternoon between meetings  when this piece of s##t lured this boy into a restroom.  Due to the fact that I got in there before anything started, nothing to bad happened.  When everyone got back to the meeting place, I think a few of the "brothers" pulled this guy into one of the rooms and that was the last time that guy ever set foot in the meeting place.

Heres the problem...At the time, the victim and myself were the same age and hung out at assembly functions - which meant we saw each other a lot.  He let me know that this guy was calling him and was acting strange.  The phone calls would get weirder by the week.  He had let people know that he had a "burden" for this kid.  I let my mom know who let some of the "brothers"know.  Apparently it wasn't a huge issue because nothing was ever done and this situation was allowed to escalate.  No doubt had it been any of the leaderships children, it would never have got this far, but because it was a child from a rough background, no credence to this boys fears was ever given.  When the situation did come to a head that day, this guy was simply told not to come back. The police were not called, and this guy more than likely was able to assult children in a different environment.  Obviously, the authorities were not called because the assembly did not want to draw any attention to itself.  Yet another way the "leadership" failed to lead and protect its "flock".

No doubt that this is not the only case.  My point for telling this is that if money is ever recovered, it would certainly be good for funds to be distributed to those who were hurt and abused the most.  

I completely stand by this account and dare anyone who was around at the time to aware of this situation to contradict this.  I don't forget!!!

 Bob Franzese
Omaha 1975 - 1993...Way to long!!!

Bob, (UhOh),

I think the problem with the mixing funds idea is that all donations were cash, and the announcement was constantly made that the money was to be used for, "the work here and abroad".  

So, anything that was done under the ministry's umbrella was "the work".

If checks were written to a non-profit corporation, and then diverted to personal use...then you've got something.

Even here there are ways to legally use non-profit funds for personal use.  The organization can buy houses, cars, or whatever for the use of the organization's officers.

I recall a Suburban that belonged to "Cornerstone" that seemed to always have a member of the Geftakys family behind the wheel.

Wrong?  Seems so to me.  Illegal, I doubt it.

Thomas Maddux

Hi Tom

Actually, this is illegal.  I have studied this in depth, and one of the requirements for church record keeping is in order to demonstrate that funds were not mingled.  

If I have two businesses, both philanthropic in nature, and I solicit donations for the one--breast cancer research let's say---but use the money for the other----an animal rights organization, I am in trouble.  Big trouble.

The same kind of laws apply for the church.

Brent

We at CAC recently learned how strict this provision is (somewhat to our surprise). If the privilege, service or gift is not fully documented as having taken place or otherwise been utilized "in the line of duty" so to speak, it must be reported as income. A Pastor for example cannot just be given an "allowance" or "stipend" even though intended to cover incurred expenses and not report that money as income unless he itemizes and documents each and every expense and pays taxes on any difference between what he received and what was incurred. Pretty clear no?
This is where I think the Government will eventually get George. They will figure out how much money the assembly took in and that it all went to George. They will review the documented expenses of his not-for-profit organizations and they will hold him liable for the difference, regardless of what he reported. I think it is only a matter of time....
Verne
p.s.
The Feds have become in recent years estremely adept at finding hidden money. How many millions do you think the Geftakys have esconced with? THE MAN TOOK IN MILLIONS!  ;D
He can in all likelihood easily pay the back taxes, penalities and interest...UNLESS THEY INDICT HIM FOR TAX EVASION  ;D

I would ask this person if they think the current leadership worthy of their trust and if so, why?If this person is a leader I would ask if they consider themselves worthy of trust and why...
Verne

Verne &/or anyone else,

I am assuming that they trust their leadership.

1. Can ex-assemblyites who choose to meet together to serve the Lord from an honest desire to glorify Him, not know the Lord's blessing and provision in their gathering?

2. Why do ex-assemblyites who choose to continue to meet together with an honest desire to glorify Him need to seek outside help, beside the books, tapes, and lectures they are using now?

Lord bless,
Marcia

Brent,

You wrote,
"Actually, this is illegal.  I have studied this in depth, and one of the requirements for church record keeping is in order to demonstrate that funds were not mingled.  

If I have two businesses, both philanthropic in nature, and I solicit donations for the one--breast cancer research let's say---but use the money for the other----an animal rights organization, I am in trouble.  Big trouble.

The same kind of laws apply for the church.

Brent "

Remember, the assembly was never incorporated.  It really didn't exist legally.  It was like a group of friends getting together and pooling their money to buy hot dogs.

I used to wonder what would happen if I just grabbed the box, threw it into my car and drove off.

What could they charge me with?  I was a member of the group.  They had no documents that could prove that the money belonged to the leader(s) any more than anyone else.  After all, we all contributed.

Neither did they have any documents to show what the money was donated for.  It was "for the work here and abroad".  Well, I was a worker wasn't I?

It was fun to think about it at the time.

So, I don't think the laws you refer to really apply.

But, I'm no lawyer, and even they don't know what the laws mean sometimes, unless there are precedents set.

Thomas Maddux

There is precedent for what I am saying.  Maurice Johnson, who George calls a cultist, has a group remarkably similar to George's.  They were not a non-profit, all tithes were considered gifts, etc.  In the late 1960's, the IRS came after them.

It was a big deal, and the IRS used section 5013C, the part that applies to religious organizations, to claim that there was plenty of back tax owed.

The Johnsonites won the case, even though they refused to file 501C3 status.  The reason they won is because they were able to demonstrate, through accurate record keeping, that all the monies were spent in a manner befitting a church.  They were faithfully performing in exactly the same manner as a 501C3, albeit without the paperwork.

George has no records, and I have proof that funds were co-mingled.  Like Verne said, it is only a matter of time.  I'll search for the link on this case I refer to above.

A church doesn't have to register with the government, but they do have to act with integrity.

Otherwise, I will turn my Chiropractic office into a church.  I'll be the Lord's Servant, my patients will be the Lord's People, and I'll provide chiropractic care, while they provide gifts, in the form of money.  I will use them for the work, here and abroad, and I won't pay any taxes.  They are gifts, afterall.

Brent

Isn't there such a thing as a "gift" tax?  If George has received a few million dollars in cash over the years as "gifts", then he should have been taxed for the gifts.  So far, I see gift-tax evasion and extortion in the posts below.  On the other hand, I remember him mentioning during a seminar several years ago how he said that he pays taxes, doesn't vote, and that he doesn't have his organization registered as a church because he wants it free from government regulations.  Given his history of lying, it seems that there may be a case against him, but an investigation involving the IRS would be the only way to find out.  If tax evasion got Capone busted, it could get George too.

http://www.bibletruths.org/

i believe this is their main website. spooky.

Yes, it is spooky.  A branch of this group meets up here in SLO, and we were told, in no uncertain terms, that they were a cult.  Well, that may be so.  However, this cult has financial records, business meetings, and they do accept checks.  

Here is a little piece of the judgement they won against the IRS.

---

It is suggested by the Government that the church does not qualify as a beneficiary for deductible contributions because no showing has been made that in the event of its dissolution its assets would by operation of law be distributed solely for religious purposes. This suggestion is prompted by Section 1.501 [c] [3]-1 of the Income Tax Regulations -- 1954 Code, 26 C.F.R. § 1.501 [c] [3]-1, which establishes certain tests which an organization must meet to be certified as exempt from income taxation -- one of such tests being that upon dissolution its assets must be distributable solely for an exempt purpose, either by the terms of its articles or by operation of law. This regulation has no governing force in respect to the determination of the deductibility of plaintiffs' contributions for two reasons. It had not yet been promulgated at the time the contributions were made or the returns filed.2 By its terms it is applicable in determining the eligibility of an organization to be certified as tax-exempt under the provisions of Internal Revenue Code Section 501, not in determining whether the organization qualifies as a beneficiary for deductible contributions under Internal Revenue Code Section 170.

The Court recognizes, however, that the two Code sections are companion provisions in the sense that they both reflect a Congressional purpose to encourage the activities of the specified organizations by special tax benefits. Thus, to the extent that a regulation promulgated under Section 501 is designed to effectuate the common Congressional purpose, it may afford some general guidance in the proper interpretation of Section 170. The regulation cited by the Government is obviously intended as a safeguard against the possibility that funds accumulated by an organization by reason of its tax-exempt status might, in the event of its dissolution, be used for purposes other than those to which it was dedicated. By analogy, it would seem a reasonable interpretation of Section 170 that an organization should be organized and operated in such a manner as to provide some assurance that contributions made to further its purposes would not, in the event of its dissolution, be used for other purposes. But, in the present case, it would be purely academic for the Court to engage in an inquiry as to whether, in the event of the dissolution of the church association in question, the laws of all the states in which it operates would assure the distribution of its assets for religious purposes only. The evidence at the trial established that the church operates in such a manner that its income is expended almost upon receipt in order to carry on its activities, and that there is no substantial accumulation either in the form of savings or physical assets. It is evident that the contributions made by the plaintiffs have long since been spent in furtherance of the religious purposes of the church, and that there is no possibility of their application to other uses.

The Government also disputes the deductibility of plaintiffs' contributions to their church because the contributions were made by checks payable to the order of four of its church's ministers. The Government cites several cases in which bequests to members of religious orders were held to be non-deductible, even though the bequests inured to the benefit of the order.3 These cases are factually distinguishable because in each the Court found that the testator intended to make the bequest to the named individual. In the present case, it is clear from the evidence that plaintiffs did not intend to make contributions to the ministers, individually, but placed the funds in their hands, as agents, for the use of the church.

The Government's final argument is that plaintiffs' contributions were not deductible because they inured to the benefit of individuals. The individuals benefited were the church's recognized ministers, who employed a portion of the contributions given for the use of the church to pay their living expenses. Such use of the contributions does not constitute a departure from the statutory requirement that no part of the net profits of the organization shall inure to the benefit of any individual, for the sums expended to meet the living expenses of the ministers were no part of the net profits of the church. They were monies expended to meet legitimate expenses of the church in implementing its religious purposes. These expenses were of the same character as the salaries paid by any religious or charitable organization to its staff. The evidence was clear that the ministers devoted the major portion of their time to the work of the church and that the amount of church funds used to pay their modest living expenses was small in comparison to the extent of their services.

The Court concludes that the church for whose use plaintiffs' contributions were made met the statutory requirements for a beneficiary of deductible contributions, and that plaintiffs were entitled to deduct such contributions from gross income in computing their net taxable income for the years 1952, 1954, and 1955. judgment will enter for plaintiffs upon findings and conclusions to be submitted to the Rules.

---

there is much more that I weeded through.  These people are exactly like the Assemby, except that in their "cult" (George's term, not mine) the ministers accept checks, and there are business meetings, and financial records that were used in a court of law to demonstrate that they were above board.  Furthermore, a number of people were involved in the financial dealings of the church, not just one person.

George's goose is overcooked.  Anyone who can prove what they gave over the years, like records, tax-deductions, withdrawel patterns, etc.  should call the IRS.  All they need is a little more paperwork.

I have studied this section of the IRS code,  1.501 c 3, and there is no way the Assembly fits the law.

Brent

Now that explains why there was a lock on it.  And why two brothers had to watch it at all times.  Oh, but maybe that was to protect the building from thugs.

Let me see if I understand this.  Brent, you are saying that the fact that we all were acting like a church and that we all understood that we were not "pooling our money together" to buy something, rather we were giving our money to church ministers ("The Lord's servants")  to carry on church business, regardless of the fact that this church was not incorporated, is cause enough to prosecute George?

The IRS prosecute people for income tax evasion, right?  Could it be proved that what was given to George was income--"income" as defined by the IRS?  

Or was it, as Tom argues, just a matter of a bunch of adults using their money however they wanted to--no documents signed, no legal entity, no records, just money spent at our discretion.

I lean towards the notion that it is income because the thing is, money was not just spent for something willy nilly.  Money was given directly to George.  And that's income. Aside from direct personal gifts, let's consider the money in the box.  
We gave it to "the church" to run church business ("the work of the Lord here and abroad").  We gave it with the understanding (an oral agreement reaffirmed every week for years) that the leading brothers, and ultimately George, were using the money for church business.  If it wasn't used for church business then that is fraud, isn't it?  And if we can apply the precedent set by the Johnsonites, it can be considered fraud even if the church is not officially registered.  Also, the money that George recieved, if not properly recorded as being used for church business is income.  

I dunno, my take on it.  Who's a lawyer?  Maybe we can get Bob Anderson to wiegh in on this, what do you think?  Oh but I think he'd probably want to explain what exactly went on in David's court case.   ::)

Arthur

No, actually the people on building watch were there to keep the building from being stolen.  ;)

I actually have a more serious question.  When the military performs air strikes, they have a period of "battle damage assessment" afterward.  I know that a number of you have been busy sending e-mails and letters and making phone calls to expose the activities of existing assemblies.  What results have you had?  And is there any fresh news on the status of existing assemblies?

mithrandir

Someone taking the "Lord's Treasury"!! Now that would make a great addition to the other clips I have in my tape: "Assembly Bloopers, Blunders and Practical Jokes". I have a short clip where a brother calls out hymn #72, but everyone starts to sing hymn #71 in error!  Hilarious!!! On another clip George reaches for the water inside the podium expecting it to be luke warm as he requires, but someone has put ice in it!!! Fall on the floor funny!!

In another clip someone distracts Bob Ford while I replace all of the books on the book table with Puritan Classics. George comes walking by and the redness in his face seems to burn right through the screen as he screams to high heaven!!  It's a kneeslapper in the extreme!!!

In another clip 4 leading brothers circle another brother and rail on him in full view of several others. The brother begins to shake and cry---but here's where the real humor comes in---they are accusing and yelling at the wrong brother!! He had nothing to do with what they are angry about. When they realize their error the laughing becomes infectious, and they tell the brother to just forget about the whole thing. It's laugh out loud funny!!!

Other clips include: "Sister without head-covering told to leave"(a belly-acher), "Brother in Jeans"(watch the facial reactions of Assembly goers as they roll their eyes and make faces, and talk behind the back of a  brother who has come to worship in jeans!!!) rip-roaring funny!!!  "Rejoicing Brother!"---on this clip watch several brothers and sisters as they are asked how they are doing. They smile widely and say "Rejoicing brother!!" but as the one asking  them starts to turn away their wide smiles return to straight faces in a matter of a second or two!! It's a howler!!!
"Stewardships"---on this bit of hilarious tape see some brothers cheat on their stewardships in order to make it on time to one event or another--one brother mops the dust under a rug and looks both ways before grabbing his books and heading out to school!!! It's a guarnateed gut-buster!!!

"All Night of Prayer"---these clips are guaranteed to leave you rolling on the floor. See brothers and sisters nod off and snore. See another sister's irritation grow and grow as a brother beside her can't stop sniffling until she angrily forces a kleenex into his face!!!   ha ha ha!!!!

Need I say more?? Buy a copy today. Just $19.99 + shipping and handling. With your order receive a beautiful lace doily that says "I endured the Assembly and all I got was this lousy head-covering". Order today!!!

We did have an incident in Ottawa about 20 years ago, when someone entered the home where we met and took off with the box. Some of the brothers were alerted to it and there was a high speed foot chase down the street. The brothers triumphed, and we had something to talk and laugh about for a few weeks.
I do not know whether or not it was Tom M since I have never met him. :)

Marcia

What's the news about the concert in the dark?

Marcia

Brent,

You are making a lot of sense.

Thomas Maddux

Interestingly enough, I went to a freshmen high school football game yesterday.  I had been to many games there before, but never on their new field. I was sitting there watching the game and shortly realized that across their new field was the old Omaha assembly building.

Many of you who have been to Omaha probably remember the big field behind the Omaha assembly building.  The high school apparently bought that land and have now fenced it all in.  For all I know, they could have done this any time in the last five or six years but it was the first time I saw it.

Some relatives I was watching the game with were shocked, but hardly suprised, to learn of the assemblys demise.

Anyway, from what I understand, this high school has already or is in the process of buying the old assembly building.  This is the information I recieved from my cousin who works at Creighton Prep, which is the high school I have been refering to.

A while back, I was talking to one of the leading brothers after the afternoon meeting.  I mentioned to him that the lock on the box was completely pointless.  I then reached down, fiddled with it for about 10 seconds, opened it, and handed it to him.

It is amazing how many different kinds of worthless locks you can buy.  Most locks for small things (like used on the boxes) can be opened by feel in a few seconds.

He told another brother that they needed to replace the lock, but it never happened.

When the Assembly moved into the Brea facility (technically still the Assembly in Fullerton), they moved into a business park that provided signage.  What do you put on the sign if your group doesn't have a name?

So, they put the descriptive term, "A gathering of Christians".  

I always wanted to sneak over one night and put similar labels on everything else - "A parking space", "A fire hydrant", "A window", "A tree", etc.

The things we dream up to point out the sillyness of it all!

When we first came out in Omaha, Phill aked if he could give by check.  The brother he asked laughed loudly and said, "Who're you going to make the check out to...God??"

Remembering,
Becky

P.S.  The first Sunday after the excomm. letter was read here in Annandale, the brother giving the announcements said, " Our offerings are a part of our worship.  There's a box in the back of the room.  The money is used for the work of the Lord both here and (pause) ummm... here."  (slightly embarassed laughter)

Dave:

Not to be a nitpick, but the last assembly building WAS in Fullerton--right on the edge, however.  We actually outreached more to La Habra and Brea than to Fullerton, as far as door-to-door was concerned.  Our building was closer to the city halls of those two other towns than to Fullerton's city hall.

At one time I actually thought that the Lord had moved us there because He wanted to work in these towns.  Some things happened, but now since everything has happened I wonder if He didn't move us to a remote corner of the city in order to keep the assembly from doing more damage than it had already done in people's lives.

My one-and-a-half cents,

Matt Sciaini

Thanks for the correction, Matt.  

I joined the Assembly just after the Hillcrest Park days and left just before the end of the Woman's Assistant League Days.

So, I never set foot in the "near Brea" facility.  Of course, if I did, I would have had to worn a sign that said, "A Visitor".

-Dave

I do not see this kind of honesty in the local gathering here. I also know of other gatherings who are not and have not promoted open and honest inquiry and discussion of assembly practices.

Pages 68 and 69 from Subtle Power...  'The Can't Talk Rule' is very insightful. Maybe I'll scan it in later and post it.

Marcia

The concert in the dark happened last Friday.  I don't know what happened there, since I wasn't present.  I was hanging out with some friends when someone came up and said, "Jack is playing at Tri-City Park.  One of us wants to go.  How about the rest of you?"  The rest of us said, "Nah!"  Just the thought of going made my body hurt.  So we all stayed where we were and had an enjoyable evening.  

I have been warning friends at work about the Geftakys groups, telling them that they might want to mention them to their church youth and college groups.  I also e-mailed them the link to the Rick Ross website.

Since you mentioned concerts, I thought I'd share portions of some song lyrics that pretty much say what I've been thinking about all that's happened.  Hope no one minds!

Regarding George, the seminars, and all the wonderful  ::) teaching we received,

"Cause he seemed like a miracle
  I ate it up like cereal
  Ah, but it was something like shrapnel..."

Regarding the collapse of the house of Geftakys,

"Get the kids and bring a sweater,
  Dry is good and wind is better,
  Count the years, you always knew it,
  Strike a match, go on and do it..."

written about someone who goes home and burns down the house in order to start a new life.

Then there's this, regarding the process of leaving the old garbage behind and starting new:

"Every now and then I can see that I'm getting somewhere,
  Where I have to go is so deep - I was angry back then
  And you know I still am,
  I have lost too much sleep, and I'm gonna find it"

Of course, when I get really mad - say, when I remember a particularly "good" time I had in the Assembly, I think of this:

"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
  Take a bow for the new revolution
  Smile and grin at the change all around
  Pick up my guitar and play
  Just like yesterday
  Then I'll get on my knees and pray
  We don't get fooled again
  No, no!"

mithrandir  ;)

Clarence,

When I left in 1990, we used to sing

"I've been through the desert with a church with no name
It's good to get out of the pain
In the desert, you can't remember your name
Cause their ain't no one there to give you no fame"

(From America, A Horse with No Name)


At the time, the line from the Eagles Hotel California was applicable as well describing the then difficult exit process:

"You can check out any time you like
but you can never leave."


-Dave

PS:  I never knew you actually sung, Clarence.  Jack always had the microphones set so you could only hear him and his guitar with the perpetually breaking string. (:>)

Of course you don't - it was a concert in the dark m'lad!!  ;D  ;D  ;D
Verne

Matthew,
     This is a distinct possibility, or, The Lord may not have moved the meeting place at all-- He may have just let it be moved.


Marcia,
     You won't see it in the gathering if it isn't already there.  Effectual fervent prayer avails much, and the honesty you hope to see can break forth in individuals who are willing to see & accept the truth, and act accordingly (repent and come out).  If this happens in one or more of the leaders, many may be blessed as a result, and you will witness the honesty outside the gathering.
     Thank you for posting the "Can't Talk" Rule on the Why Leaders Are Responsible thread.

Clarence (Mithrandir) & Dave,

     Well said sung!

al Hartman





     

I appreciate Al's post.
Let us not forget our disussion of anger is taking place in the context of what happened in the assemblies.
Clearly, Scripture does not condemn anger in and of itself. We are instucted to be angry and sin not. The Lord Himself on many occasions in his perfect humanity displayed this emotion.
I want to speak to some of you from the bottom of my heart.
 When I first read Rachel's account on this website and the horrific stories about Judy appearing in meetings with cuts and bruises as well as David,
When I read about the absolutely horrific things George Geftakys was saying in public about his own grand-daughter, when I read about the way George had absolutely bruatlized one of the dearest sisters( Diane S.) that I have ever known etc. etc. ad nauseam....

I thought of all the so-called men of stature in leadership in the asemblies.
I thought about all the saints who prided themselves on the "heavenly vision" they had.
I thought about all the workers who were supposed to be the spiritual elite among God's people...
I thought about the families, marriages, lives -  totally destroyed...

Yet while both physical and spiritual blood was flowing freely...no one got angry...!

Those of you who come onto this web-site and berate and condemn those of us who have shed bitter tears over our sin of complicity, and our unspeakable and dismal failure to act, lest, God forbid, we would be perceived as beng angry...I want to remind you of our dark legacy of shame. I want you to stop your pompous sermonising about "grace" and "humility" without regard to proper context. I want to hear you admit, that it was our shameful cowardice, our Godless idolatry, our spiritual dullnes, and ultimately our willful disobedience, that failed to make us angry during the assembly reign of terror.
I want to ask some of you pious pontificators:
HAVE WE LEARNED NOTHING????

friends...there is a time for righteous anger...if you feel called to excercise the gift of mercy do it with diligence. Please do not harshly condemn those who feel called to rebuke sharply...there were obviously too few in the assemblies...


Constrained by His mighty love,
Verne
p.s. Brent Tr0ckman, thanks again for having been the conscience of the assembly community. This is a debt that can never be repaid and will not be forgotten- not while I can post.

What I am saying is this:

We gave money to a church that we thought was legit, honest, and about God's business.  We did not give money to a man, or to pay someone's salary, or anything like that.  We ridiculed people who were salaried clergymen!  We derided churches who had a business meeting.  Read Testimony to Jesus, and these thought are communicated in the first chapter.

If the money was used for anything that was not, "church business," then fraud was committed.  Bob Anderson told me that my numbers in the Rick Ross piece I wrote, "What happens to the Money?" were "not far off at all."  He didn't know the exact amount, because there was no accounting of it, but he felt that I was within a hundred grand or so.

Samuel Ochengele is not a millionaire, so George can't say he gave all the money to Samuel.  

Bottom line, I absolutely guarantee that fraud was committed, pockets were lined, money was put in foreign accounts, and family members were shown favoritism over the other workers.

How many of you feel good about the fact that your tithes were used to implant tissue from aborted fetuses into David Geftakys?  This alone cost more than 40,000.00, cash.  Do you feel good about this?  

How many of you, upon giving money into the box-on-the-back-table, are happy about the fact that it ended up under the hood of one of David's cars?

No records, mingling of funds, use of funds for things other than "The Work of the Lord,"---all of this means taxes owed.  I am 100% confident in this, and have spoken to people who know.

The IRS needs records.  Anyone who can document how much they gave only need pick up the phone.  Bank withdrawels that fit a pattern, computer programs, charitable contributions on tax returns, all of this is evidence.  

Just because you gave in cash doesn't mean you can't document what you gave.  10% is the same, whether it's cash or check.  Did you habitually take cash back from paycheck deposits?  Did you make ATM withdrawels on the first every month?

Phone calls people.  That's all it takes.   It's a no brainer.  Gifts my arse!!!

Brent

These are stories told to retread by an Ottawa LB.

Marcia

Is there a statute of limitations for tax fraud?  How far back in years can the Geftakys fraud activity be considered in a case against him?  10 years?  The more the better.

quote--
I also want to say that due to the recent shakeup in the ministry in the USA during the early part of this year, our Chinese friends were informed of what happened at the very beginning. Contrary to some reports that I have heard, I want to dispel any misinformation on this. The work in China is proceeding because the Lord is here in our midst. It is the Chinese who have taken up the mantle of the ministry here. They are leading the work here in loving compassion for the sheep and in unselfish devotion to the Lord. It is wonderful just to sit back and see the LORD do HIS work. We have received counsel and encouragement from prominent house church leaders, whom I will refrain from naming, here in both China and in Hong Kong. These are friends who suffered much in the past under totalitarianism and years of imprisonment for the Lord. They know what happened. They say the Lord is with us! Continue by faith! We will abide by their counsel because we know that the Lord is with them also. I have also received the same counsel from American and other international friends as well who are involved with other works and ministries. The saints are not exclusive here in China. There is a humility present with most of the saints. We are what we are by the grace of God.
--end-quote

Ing Ling Chin sent us this news about a month ago, but I neglected to read the entire email since it was addressed to my husband. My husband encouraged me to post this.

At the end of April a couple from Beijing stayed in our home for about 10 days. I personally witnessed their devotion and love for the Lord. They had not 'grieved' the Holy Spirit, and were/are still sensitive to His leading in their lives. I will have to agree that the China assemblies are more autonomous than the assemblies on the North American continent.

And that is excellent news.  George's influence can be purged, but his control must be broken.  He didn't control all of the foreign groups.....Praise God!


Brent

How strange it is that our foreign brethren appear to have been in possession of much more discernment and integrity than those nurtured and cultivated in GG's bosom...and we supposedly had so much to teach them...I could tell you stories about our dear brother Peter Kibas in Kenya...
Verne

Verne,

Isn't Peter Kibas the brother who lived in Fullerton for a while, and then went back to Kenya, only to "leave the work, and draw back in service to the Lord?"

If I have the right guy, I would love to hear what really happened.

You know,  If some other people had been willing to hold George accountable, and break the can't talk rule, then you wouldn't have needed a rude, unloving, graceless, divisive, arrogant, sarcastic, satanic, ambitious, person like me to do it. (I am told by certain geftaysservants that these words describe me.)

It would have been much nicer, both for them and me.  Too bad.

Brent

I'd like to give you all a further update on Cornerstone Academy.

The school property has been sold.  Escrow has closed and money has changed hands.  I heard that some people were asking what would be done with the money, and were being given the run-around.  So I asked Rod Zach point-blank what would be done with the money.  He said, "The school board will decide."  End of subject.

Well, giving that kind of answer to me is kind of like slapping a pit bull.  So I said, "Rod, let me tell you what I think should be done with the money.  The 'school board' should hold public meetings where the handling of the money is publicly decided, with public, well-kept, traceable records of what happens to the money.  All the leaders in Fullerton were standing up in front of us in January all crying about how they were deceived by George and were repenting.  One way to show repentance is by doing things out in the open.  Anything less than this would be unsatisfactory."

So he asked, "Unsatisfactory for you?"  I said, "Unsatisfactory for the 'school board.'  Some of you don't seem to understand.  You all stood up in front of us for years and told us that you were God's servants, that we needed to submit to you and imitate your example, and that we could trust you to advise us.  And some of us took some extremely heavy hits from you over the years - and we just swallowed it.  Now you can't figure out why so many of us have been so angry with you over the last seven months (in fact, I'm still angry).  If the school board wants to carry on like nothing has changed, I can't stop you.  I never had much authority around here, and now I have even less because I'm on the outside.  But the 'school board' had better worry about God, and all those things in Ezekiel 34 and Matthew 23.  It all applies."  

Rod said, "Well, pray for the school board."  I said, "I will.  And I'll pray for you."

My thoughts on this  It seems that nothing has changed with certain people.  They are still as willing as ever to sell their souls for some loose change.  I have very little hope that the 'school board' will act righteously with the money.  I have said before that I think they should give the money to a charity and that they should do it publicly.  Some of the money could also be given to one of the Cornerstone teachers who has had to live at the poverty level for several years in her "service" to the school.  But it appears that whatever the 'school board' does, it will be done in secret.  By the way, I believe Jack Hanson, Ginger Geftakys and Rod Zach comprise the 'board'.

I am grieved for the children of some of these leaders, because over the years I have gotten to know many of them and have developed delightful friendships with them.  I have loved hanging out with them, enjoying their cute, goofy quirkiness, and just having fun with them.  It is because of the kids that I have gone easy on the parents.  It is because of my friendships with the kids that I posted anonymously at first.  But if the parents are going to live in willful dishonesty, they will eventually ruin their kids.  The Lord Himself said, "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel about on sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he becomes one, you make him twofold a son of hell as yourselves."

I have to say that at this stage of my life, there are people I am truly sorry to have met, sorry to have known.  It would have been better for me never to have met them.  This is a heavy thing to have to say.  Indeed, all I can say is, may God have mercy on their souls before it's too late.  I believe I have done my duty in helping to blow the whistle on these people, but continuing to monitor what the existing Geftakysites do is kind of like staring continuously at a clogged toilet.  And there is that verse in Phillipians 4, "Finally, whatever things are good, whatever things are right,...think on these things."  I believe that the Geftakysites will not change.  They are going to do what they are going to do unless God takes all power of action away from them (perhaps through getting caught in things that are plainly illegal).  For me, however, it may be time to look at something much more encouraging, and to leave them in God's hands.  Something to think about...

mithrandir

Clarence

Who owned the building?  Whose name is on the trust deed?
If Cornerstone was a non-profit, then its assets must be disposed of in the form of charitable contributions.  If anyone makes a dime off of this, they are committing a serious tax crime.

I am calling someone tomorrow morning about this.  If you can tell me who is on the deed, or what the address of the property is, I would appreciate it.

Brent

Verne,   Samuel must have really bowled you over for you to give him such a free ride!  I am wondering how many messages, calls or letters Brent has from the foreign assemblies?  It wasn't that long ago that Samuel referred to George as"The Lord's Servant!"   He was peddling the same stuff and was either deceived or accountable...Which is it???Or is it a lot of both?

Verne, I'm sorry but this statement is rather hypocritical to me: "our foreign brethren appear to have been in possession of much more discernment and integrity"  
   On what do you base this...has any of them come out publicly and denounced the teachings of George or is it the same old lines that we've read here over and over again?   It seems to me that you are using a different measuring device.
   Like I said earlier, Brent must have tons of messages from Samuel and others.

Brent, I hope that you leave a forwarding address if you move so that one day, and I believe this will happen, you will receive numerous letters of apology and appreciation from former leaders and workers in this false ministry.

Thankful for Truth and Grace,  Tony Edwards

Well Tony, the fact is my assessment could be wrong. It would be pointless for me to argue with your viewpoint since you have not talked to Samuel and do not know what your position would be if you did. Why do we not simply observe what he does?
Let me explain something to you about African culture, a matter completely lost on George Geftakys and thoroughly abused by him. There is no respect due, such as is due the one holding the position of an elder of the people and I don't mean that in just the spiritual sense. George was viewed by many as both. George's awful shortcomings were not at all lost on Samuel. No question he and others failed to effectively respond with regard to the Biblical prescription for a man of George Geftakys' ilk. For that he accepts responsibility.
The constraints Samuel faced in dealing with George Geftakys not only spiritually but also culturally is something the parochial of mind will not easily understand. If you think I am giving him a free ride as compared to the responsible men in Fullerton, so be it. I am quite comfortable with that.
Verne

Hi Tony,

My two cents worth.

I had to evaluate as well whether or not I had been bowled over by the Chinese couple, hence my reason for not commenting on them earlier. Ing's email helped to solidify my inclination to believe that the Chinese (and also the Nigerian) assemblies were more autonomous than the North American ones.

I do not believe that they had worker's meeting where they reviewed the Fullerton worker's meeting notes. I do not believe that they called Fullerton once a week to get 'programmed'. If they called any one, it was very likely that they called Roger Grant or Wayne Mathews. Also, Ing was quick to inform GG not to go to China on his January itinerant trip. Ing did this before the excomm.. but upon hearing of the DG issue (I think).

In a way it would have been great if Sam O and James O had indeed entreated GG on his issue at the worker's conf. But though they didn't then, God did not forget. PTL for Brent who was willing to torch the testimony :) to Geftakysism at great 'cost' to himself.

Anyway, something to think about.
Lord bless,
Marcia

Same one Brent. George Geftakys did not reckon on one thing- Peter Kibas is a Masai.
When it comes to a well-defined sense of self, the Masai are peerless,  I will give you the details privately. No one dominates members of this tribe. No one!
Peter Kibas did the same thing I did - took a close look at George Geftakys and what he stood for and walked away.
 I just love the man!
Peter has planted several churches in Kenya and is a dynamic force for the gospel in that country. I spent some time with him in Nairobi last Summer and he is doing very well, most recently as professor of Economics at the U.S. International University Nairobi campus.
Verne

You noticed George did not visit Kenya for the last several years. He led many of us to believe that he was somehow a favorite of former president Moy...you don't know the half of it...!

Clarence,

I agree with the perspectives you have presented in this post. I want my money back so that I can help support a poor sister who was 'abused' by the Geftakys family, but who learned to endure hardness and trust God. She now wants to go to China as a missionary with OMF. There are many needy ones out there who deserve the money that was misused by GG and family.

Lord bless,
Marcia

It is not co-incidental that George's house of cards was aided in its downward crash by the testimony of a member of his own family.
It was necessary that the downfall of George Geftakys be leveraged from someone inside. God fingered Brent Tr0ckman. It could never have been done by Samuel and James. They would have been sent back to Nigeria in disgrace (and Ogebe was a Chief Justice!) and it would have been sanctioned by the Fullerton bosses. I think that outcome would have been preferable. It is always right to stand for righteousness, no matter the cost. They were practical, ( if not Scriptural) in their choice. The Fullerton bretheren, however, are supremely culpable for George's legacy.
Verne

Right on Clarence!  Way to hold them accountable.  That is exactly what is needed and you told him right to his face!  Frankly, I'm surprised he listened to you at all.


Man if that doesn't sound familiar.  That is just like Rod to turn the issue around and put the blame on the one doing the inquiry.  Grrr, getting angry...grrr...ok, I'm calm.

Keep up the good work, bro.  We're pulling for ya.

If you need any moral support down there to confront these guys, I may just be moved to make the arduous drive to back u up.  And I promise to use the public rest rooms this time.  ;)

Arthur

You forgot "covetous".  That was like the main one for a long time.

I'm there for ya.

Arthur   ;D

When I went to Amsterdam 2000 with my wife a few years ago (I work for Samaritan's Purse, so got a free ride to go there and help), I met hundreds of evangelists just like Samuel - in a good sense.  They were earnest, singleminded, and undestracted from the trappings we so often face as Christians in America.

I used to think what an unprecidented contact Samuel was for the ministry and was awed that George was invited to the exotic continent of Africa.  When I met all these evangelists from Africa, South America and Asia, I discovered that any one of us could fanangle a "journey".  Evanglists from small African villages would LOVE for an American teacher to travel to their home to help them with their work if we pay the expenses.   I got several invitations myself and you would too if you met them.

Steve Irons once made an off the cuff comment about how much the ministry helped Samuel.  Apparently, we sent money to him to help him build his home as well as supply a vehicle for his ministry.   I am sure it was a difficult position for Samuel wondering how to challenge George knowing how how much George's ministry provided for him materially (relatively speaking - a little goes a long way in a poor nation).   Not to mention the cultural challenges that Verne pointed out.

I was worried about Samuel being in this kind of bind and am thankful that he is apparently working his way out of it.

Well geez. thats a real neutral school board.  Glad to see that they were sticking true to assembly form with no system of checks and balances whatsoever!!!

I can just see their meeting...

Rod:  "Its time to call this meeting to order.  The main topic of today is how to distribute the assets of the Cornerstone Academy..."

Ginger:  "Well, I need a new car, and I can tell you that at some point and time, my husband is going to see the light and realize that he needs to lose that 120 pounds of excess blubber...Weight watchers program aren't exactly cheap these days..."

Jack:  "Well I...."

Rod:  Then its settled, 100% of all assets will be given to George Geftakys...We really need to help our brother in this time of need.  Since he has been excommunicated, his cash flow has substantially decreased.  Our brother has suffered enough.  Settled!!! Lets pray.

Uh-oh----

That's funny!!! ;D ;D        But I think you hit the nail on the head!!

--Joe

Hi Tony

I don't have any messages from Samuel.  Not a single one.  I have a few messages from France, and Holland, but none from Nigeria.  There could be several reasons for this, but I honestly don't know the real reason, and don't care to speculate at this time.  

If Samuel was able to please an arrogant, prideful, unentreatable, evil man like Verne, then he must be fairly clear about where he stands.  We all know that Verne is a totally one-sided follower of Brent Tr0ckman. ;)

I think we need to keep an open mind, be patient, and view Samuel as a brother of like-precious faith, until he makes it clear that he is something else.  He can only do this by clear actions to the contrary.

My own take on "foreign" Assemblies is that they were still being courted by George, and had yet to be married by him.  For that reason, he had not exercised the control and abuse on them that he did with us.  They are probably in a different state that Fullerton or Omaha.  However, God, and only He, knows what is to happen.  We can only observe behavior and listen to words.  I am going to extend Christian Fellowship to Samuel, should I get the chance, and he is going to have to work very hard in order to convince me that he is a geftakysservant.

Brent

These are good points, David,   George used people wherever he could.   I do understand the cultural issues and know that that would be cause for certain actions or lack thereof.   The only foreign ministers I spoke to while in the Assembly were Herbert, Hendra and Samuel...and I consider each of those encounters as a blessing.   My only point was addressing a comment that the African etc. ministers had a higher level of discernment and integrity than the North American leaders.   Maybe true...partially true...just thought it was a rather generalized statement and wondered on what basis that Verne made this conclusion.  I totally agree that the Fullerton leaders are MUCH more accountable than others with some possible exceptions.  BTW, does anyone know the health status of Herbert?
God Bless, Tony

Nothing "generalized" about it. Look at the facts. In not a single instance that I am aware of, was the movement to declare unequivocally that George Geftakys was an out an out fraud and to encourage people to deliver themselves from his wicked influence, initiated by those in leadership.
They were all dragged kcking and screaming to this acknowledgement. It was the departure and outspoken-ness of the rank and file that brought many gatherings to a stand-still.
Very few if any leaders displayed integrity, initiative and resolve in the face of developing events! They did the opposite in that they tried to protract George's sad legacy. Many of them are still doing so. Others would if they could.

Ing Ling's response, for example, to the news of George's conduct was immediate and resolute. He did not wait for approval from Fullerton. He conducted himself as a true steward of the House. Peter Kibas did the same as did others. I feel truly sorry for the men in Fullerton. They have an frightful amount to answer for...and they know it.
The staying of God's hand of judgment has little to do I think with any expectation on His part of their ultimate repentance. They had decades. I am of the opinion that there is much corrupt fruit yet to be borne from the long season of  sowing wicked seed.
So you see Tony, a mere reflection of the facts already at your disposal should fully dispel any confusion you have over the basis for my observations- no hypocrisy here my friend.
Verne
p.s.
Does anybody again reading Steve Iron's account of his departure have any doubt that George Geftakys and the enablers around him were steeped in conspiratorial wickedness?  They deliberately targeted Lee Irons because of his intellectual gifts and Steve unwisely handed him over to that Neanderthal Dan Notti. So far as the ultimate outcome concerning Lee, Steve was one of the lucky ones.  Some of these guys were too spiritually dense to see the effect this wicked man was having on the very ones they loved most - their families!There should be only one consistent policy toward those seeking to make excuses for or justify the reprehensible conduct of this evil cabal - incinerate 'em!

"Get the kids and bring a sweater,
  Dry is good and wind is better,
  Count the years, you always knew it,
  Strike a match, go on and do it..."

from "Sunny Came Home," by Shawn Colvin

Brent,

You asked if I knew whose name was on the deed for Cornerstone.  I don't.  I was never that well-connected with the assembly hierarchy.  

I thought some more about this last night.  Here's what I think should be done with the money (but then again, I'm just a bus driver...what do I know?).  I think there is one teacher there who should definitely get two months' severance pay plus enough cash to buy things she desperately needs.  This teacher (whom I shall not name) gave herself to the point of living in virtual poverty during the many years she labored at Cornerstone.  There is one other person who because of having a large family may qualify for severance pay - but I don't think anything more than this should be given to him.  All the rest should go to charity.  And all things should be done out in the open - no exceptions!

mithrandir

The name of the former and new owners of the building is public record.  The county recorders office in Santa Ana has names and dollars exchanged for real estate transactions within Orange County.  All what's needed is an address to get the info.  Could somebody post the building's address?  With it, I can go to Santa Ana to get the info and post it on this BB.  It could be a nice addition to the record.  

I'll get the building address.

mithrandir

Verne,

I don't recommend that you apply for a 'diplomatic' position anytime soon; maybe a hell, fire, and brimstone preacher would suit you better.

Marcia

Why Marcia...why on earth would you think such a thing? And I thought you had found me to be the perfect gentleman!
(except of course, and some people just don't get this, when I am dealing with spiritual thugs and criminals)
Verne

The property once known as the site of Cornerstone Academy, now Heritage Christian School, is located here:

Heritage Christian School
1620 N. Placentia Avenue
Fullerton, CA 92831

It is located on the southwest corner of Placentia Avenue and Topaz Lane in Fullerton.

mithrandir

Actually, there was a time when we, here in the USA, practiced "gunboat diplomacy,"  and "Big Stick" diplomacy.  Verne would have been a good diplomat in those days.  

However, today our unity is in diversity, and we want to build national defense through awareness and sensitivity.  I agree with you Marcia, Verne would be a terrible diplomat in today's world.

Brent

Thanks, I got some other chores to do in Santa Ana next week, so I'll post the public record that's available on the property asap.

Fall has arrived.  Yesterday was the last day of summer, I believe (or is it today?).  As the end of the year approaches, we look forward to many things.  And one of those things, I'm afraid, is the need to sound another warning about the existing Geftakys assemblies.

Specifically, as the end of the year approaches, many of these assemblies will begin planning Christmas project outreaches to juvenile institutions.  While it is commendable to visit those in prison, the assemblies are not fit for this work.  Sure, they will preach the Gospel, but they will also try to recruit young men and women who are about to be released.  The last thing one of these kids needs is to get out of jail, only to join a Geftakys assembly.

So I am asking that we send out warnings to the youth chaplains at the juvenile detention facilities in our localities, in those places where a Geftakys assembly continues to exist.  If you live in Fullerton, Placentia or Riverside, and you were formerly involved in the Orange County Juvenile Hall Christmas projects, you can contact Steve Lowe.  He is one of the Protestant chaplains, and has been the point of contact for the assemblies in Fullerton, Placentia, and Riverside.  I have been very active in warning people on campus and in other places in Fullerton and Placentia.  I would be happy to warn Steve Lowe also.  But I would be even happier if someone out there took it upon himself to issue this warning.  I'd rather not be the only one in Orange County sounding an alarm about the Geftakys groups.

Clarence Thompson
aka mithrandir

Clarence,

Any volunteers yet? I'll do it if no one else has volunteered. All I need to do is send Steve Lowe a brief letter and refer him to www.geftakysassembly.com. He can then decide for himself wheter or not he want the assemblies involved in Christmas OR at the juvenile detention facilities. :)

Lord bless,
Marcia

Steve Lowe is very familiar with the Assembly.  He has worked with the group since the earely 1980's, if not before.  He has had personal run ins with Beth Alex (appointed leader by of the Juvenile Ministry) back then.

I remember a Juvenile meeting around 1984 when Steve met with us and explained that while Beth was in charge of our juvenile ministry outside of prison walls, he was in charge when it involved his kids inside the prison.  He speech was grumbled about afterwards, of course, but he was right.

So all that to say, whatever you may tell Steve about the Assembly is not going to come as any surprise and it isn't like he hasn't been monitoring the situation for years.

On a practical note.  The Saints have gone into Juvenile Hall for years sharing the gospel and they have done that very well from my experience.  The few (and I mean really few) who actually came out to the Assembly afterwards were often actually helped by the likes of Mark Wheel, Gilbert DeLeon, John Kehoe, Tom Summerford and Richard Santallian.(sp?).

I guess I don't see a big need to spend lots of energy sounding the alarm.  I don't see the propensity or opportunity for mass brainwashing here.  

I see a group of Christians who may have unorthodox views on the church and sanctification who will go in and preach a gospel you and I would probably agree with.  If they are successful in finding someone to disciple, they will probably invite them to meetings (which may actually be a better alternative than being invited back to a gang).  However, they will also probably treat him or her with a certain measure of genuine care and tough love as well.


I guess this raises the larger question:  In a country with relative freedom of religion, there are lots of goofball groups running around - some that make the Assembly look like a picnic in comparson.  Do we spend all of our times as watchdogs trying to keep people from attending JW meetings?  Or snakehandler meetings?  Or Local Church?  Or Mormons?  

Or do we get on with the Lord and try and model something better?  Do we try and show grace and minister to people in the Assembly in hopes that we win the right to speak to them?

I don't really have an interest in trying to shut down their Christmas projects.  I would rather attempt to have the opportunity to encourage Assembly folks to send out Christmas cards.  I think their parents would appreciate it after all these years of neglect.

Let God bring judgement where judgement is due.  On your part, show grace and humility or the fight will never end.

Dave,

I would have to respectfully disagree with you.  The reason we should warn others about the Assembly and not other groups is that the Assembly is part of our sorry past.  It's our turf.  The best contribution we can make is to warn people, "Don't do what we did!".  Warning people is part of getting on with life, as well as comforting others who have left abusive groups.  There are plenty of former members of goofball groups that can warn others about their particular group.  

Also, warning others about the assembly does not constitute judgment.  We are simply doing what others before us should have done, but didn't.

As far as the juvenile hall outreach is concerned, I would much rather see the kids going to a healthy church.  The last thing they need is to get saved only to end up in the Assembly looney bin, and then turn against God in anger when they wake up and smell the coffee grounds.

Just my take....

Jack

I'm thinking along the same lines, Jack.  Anybody coming to an assembly meeting should have access to enough information to enable them to make a fully informed decision about just what they're visiting.  This includes knowing the history of it.  
Zealous repentance of supporting this ministry for us includes a desire to spare others the pain, if possible.

BW

I understand what you folks are saying.  In fact, I felt that way 13 years ago when I left.   Some of it was rooted in a genuine desire to get information out into the hands that needed it.  Much of it sprung from feeling cheated and wanting to "right the wrong" of the Assembly.  Very legitimate feelings.  

However, my point is this.  Other than the campus ministry (and mainly Tim and Jim), the Assembly has an abismal success rate when it comes to outreach.  Concerts in the park, juvenile outreaches, door-to-door convinces virtually no one to come out - maybe one or two in a five year streatch and the chances of them staying around for very long is pretty small.

So you can put out this massive information campaign to discredit every outreach in hopes of sparing this one or two.   But in doing so, you further alienate those who are still in the Assembly.  They will circle the wagons and build a fortress mentality against you since that is what they have been conditioned to do for thirty years (and you give them good reason to do so).  You thus sabotage any opportunity to help those in the Assembly find their way out with your help.  Do you think they will come to you now if they begin to question their involvement?  

As a result, you are really not practically helping anyone.  Is it worth it?

I don't have a problem if you happen to run into someone who is going to a meeting and you say, "hey, did you look at www.geftakysassembly.com?  You might want to look at the history of this group before you consider joining."  But to go on this all out search and destroy mission to discredit them at every turn seems like a wasteful use of energy.  An exercise in burning bridges and closing doors.  An act that will only strenthen their resolve that they must stand together against the dark forces of the enemy.  

When we try to reach Muslems, we become a part of their life and spend years trying to win their confidence.  When Young Life tries to reach High School students, they ignore the outward sin and rebellion and try to build a relationship until they have the right to be heard.  If those in the Assembly are "so deceived", then why don't we do the same with them?

And what is the worst that could happen if that one person in five years comes into fellowship?  You assume if he didn't he would join a "healthy church"?  How are you so sure that he wouldn't have joined something worse?

I think you will be more effective in helping if you wait several years until the hurt heals.  And you do this by getting involved with a ministry or small group in a healthy church, building new relationships, being honest and open, developing friendships.  Then your life will demonstrate a true and wholesome alternative.

I agree with Dave in his latest post.  You guys from SLO remember the year we put a door hanger on every door in the city?  It was something like 15,000, and all of zero people showed up to the gospel campaign (not including saints or transients who live in the park).  I know this lack of fruit was not indigenous to our assembly alone. (What was that verse so often quoted? -- "Unless the Lord build the house, the laborers labor in vain."  So true.  :'( )

The campus, however, produced at least one or two per year that stuck around for at least six months or more.
I don't know what good a blanket campaign against the assembly would do.  If someone was going to warn someone, I think the ones who would listen would be people who are just coming out and getting interested, especially those from campus.  It's great that there is now a website to show these people.

At the time that I joined there was some warning, but it seemed very obtuse. There was the Churches that Abuse book, but the stories in there seemed too vague and too far fetched to be believable.  There was the rick ross site, but there was only one or two accounts on there and one was this story about George hiding gold bars under his floor boards in his house.  Again, it was easily dismissable.  Also, whatever warning there was, there was no warning about it being a cult or about false doctorine being taught--it was just an "abusive church", or a "fringe group".

But now, there is testimony after testimony with specific examples up on the site and people that can be emailed to verify the accounts and talk to about their experiences.

Of course, if a person so warned goes back to the leadership to ask them about it, they will be lied to--hopefully they will make the right decision.

Funny, there were people that I went out to on campus who got excited about the things that were shared from the Bible, but the moment they came to one of our community meetings, I never saw them again.  I guess they got the hint without even needing a website.   :-\  Maybe someone warned them.

Arthur

Dave,

Your point about few visitors is right on.  The Lord said to the Pharisees that though they went to the ends of the earth to make just one disciple, that disciple turned out to be twice the son of hell that the Pharisees were.  That was us.

I'll be willing to bet, though, that the efforts of those who are warning are not nearly of the same magnitude that we made while in the Assembly.  And, we now know that we really are pointing people in the right direction.

I should clarify that I do not assume that people will be in a healthy church if the Assembly is not allowed in juvenile hall outreaches.  You made a good point.

I think that the desire to warn is a healthy one, even if it doesn't last.  I doubt my desire to warn people will remain as strong as it is now.  Maybe it's just part of the process of healing.  So I'll keep warning people, though I will consider what you've said.

As far as circling the wagons is concerned, you're right.  They are building up a wall of denial that is no doubt even higher than we had (this is what makes these groups even more dangerous than they were before January).  However, the reason they are doing it is because they know the truth is now readily available as never before, but they CHOOSE to ignore it.  There is no excuse for being ignorant of the truth (for those who were in the Assemblies before January).  We are not to blame for their stubbornness.

At this point in my life I have no desire to hang out with those on the inside to get them to trust me.  I also don't want to be lured back into the twisted thinking of the Assembly mindset.  Maybe in a few years I would be able to take it, but not now.

Freedom is dangerous, for it gives us the ability to really mess up our lives.  Fortunately, it also gives us the ability to warn others about the concequences of the choices they are making.

Jack

I think there is wisdom in what Dave is saying here.  As far as I know, there is only one person who ever "came into fellowship," from the juvenile hall.  There can't be more than 5 total, over the years, who joined and stayed.

I don't recall anyone ever joining as a result of a concert either.   Tent meetings were a tremendous exercise in make-believe, but it was good to see your friends from other Assemblies who came out to swell the ranks.  Midnight doorkeeping was also fun, because the testimony was almost always "attacked" by local pranksters.  ;D

It seems to me that the place to really make a difference is on the college campus.  That is the place that fresh converts were ensnared.  If each campus is warned, specifically the other Christian groups on campus,  much more would be acomplished than trying to shut down juvenile hall.   At least it seems that way to me.

Keep in mind that a handful of middle-aged saints must now carry the burden that 100 young servants used to do.  I seriously doubt if outreach is real popular right now in Fullerton.  Let 'em burn out, and perhaps some of us will be around to talk to them in a few months.

Who knows what neat things George will do this year?   He had a glorious seminar over labor day in Mike Almanzor's living room.  Perhaps he can travel to Sacramento for the fall journey?   ;)

Think back five years and pretend someone told you what is going on today.  Could you have even comprehended it?  All we are seeing now is a withered stump oozing sap.  You still don't want to sit on it, because it will ruin your pants, but the roots aren't going to clog the sewer anymore.....

Brent

During my brief stay in Fullerton, I would go toi the park outreaches just to hang out with the few friends I had.  There were so many "saints" there that I did not know, so I wouldn't have known who was a visitor or not...and I didn't care either!

Has anyone ever considered that the people who willingly remian under the evil system erected by George Geftakys may be displaying evidence of God's judgment on them? We at least have the excuse that we were ignorant. One has to conclude in view of what has been revealed that those who remain there  do so by choice. It seems to me that harboring notions that we are somehow going to be able to deliver them by our care and compassion is an entirely misplaced expectation. I believe the Scriptural prescription for these people is that they are to be left alone.
Verne

I agree, but if there are any newcomers they wouldn't know the past history, and a warning may save them from being ensnared.  Of course, it would probably be painfully obvious to almost any potential visitor that something's a bit different about these people, especially now.


Kinda reminds me of the snares to avoid in Proverbs 2 and 7.  
Funny (and sad) thing is, I thought that was what I was doing when I threw my lot in with the saints in the first place.  Now I was reading my Bible ("incline thine ear unto wisdom") instead of watching TV ("to deliver thee from the way of the evil man").  Guess I was wrong.  Better to watch the boob toob than be like a moonie. ::)  
(Just kidding.  I think the idea is good.  It is good to hear His voice and follow him--but just well away from the wolves and enchanted sheep).  

I guess my living across the country and haven't been in an Assembly meeting for 13 years, I am not prepared to make such a pronouncement.

Those who I have chatted with who are attempting to meet in Fullerton were:
1.  No longer exclusive - didn't have a big problem whether people stayed in the Assembly and left.
2.  Were open to listening to other speakers.
3.  Called me seeking reconciliation for past offensives.
4.  No longer viewed me as walking in darkness.

Excluding those Assemblies who are in denial about George's sins I didn't receive reason to doubt their motives.

The general concensus I came to in discussion is trying to meet in Fullerton is unwise (it really wan't going anywhere as one person told me).  But is John Kehoe and Gary Halverson and Gary Wilson evil because they are gathering for a Bible Study in Fullerton (if they even still are)?  I don't think so.  Is Mark Miller evil because he is trying to make good on a committment to stick around as a shepherd?  I doubt it.  (In fact, I think he would rather join his wife at E.V. Free, but feels he has to make good on his word).

Maybe I have old or incorrect information.  But I haven't been converted to the "those who still meet are evil" theory.  I think many are sincerly attempting to see God do a good work.  Whether they are successful or not is another matter.

Hi Dave,

I do not doubt the sincerity of existing assemblyites to repent and make things right and to know and do the Lord's will. I suppose if Mark Miller joined his wife at EVFree then he might be accused of abandonning the flock. I am of the opinion that those who continue to meet have a difficult time breaking free from the old habits and harmful teaching and need a fresh Christian environment to 'clear' their heads (I include myself in this). Before GGs excomm... they/we were equally as sincere to serve the Lord, but were sincerely deceived.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Dave has it right folks.  The bold emphasis in his quote is mine.

There is a huge difference between Fullerton and Riverside, Sacramento, San Francisco.

Brent

Oh, one other thing.  Those that continue to meet, and insist that they never followed George, or that George didn't have much influence, etc.  may not be evil, but they are certainly deceived.  It is indeed unwise to continue in such a state, because it leads to evil.

Deception and denial are not good foundations to build/re-build upon.

Brent

Hi all,

In thinking about this, it helps to keep in mind that most people's basic reason for being in a cult is emotional, not intellectual.  The doctrines of the group are accepted as supports for what people already want to believe.

That is why people find/found it so easy to deflect criticism from outside and to ignore "red flag moments" when they happened.  Researchers in the field of Language Acquisition have learned that children have what they call an "affective filter" which means that they just stop paying attention to incoming information that raises their anxiety level beyond a certain point.

I think that cult memebers do just about the same thing.

Another factor is that cults provide a worldview that helps people to make sense of a very confusing and sometimes threatening world.  "We are a community of light and life in the midst of a community of death and darkness".  This is actually a summary of an entire worldview that the GG cult and other cults promote.  

To leave the cult, people have to abandon not just the organization and its leaders, they have to actually change their inner map of reality.   This is NOT easy to do.  

Those who left on their own over the years understand this, believe me.

The exposure of gross immorality on the part of members of the Royal Family of the assembly sort of "blew" people out of their inner "world".  They were shocked into  facing things that they had been able to deflect before. (In saying this, I realize that most rank and file folks only knew a few of the facts, or didn't know about it at all.)

Some folks have such a deep seated need/desire to maintain their worldview that they have treated the information about GG and family the way the body treats TB virus.  It incapsulates it in order to keep the infection from spreading.  GG was bad, but the teachings are still true.

Mentally, that is what many have done.

Finally, some folks just don't want to lose the friendships  established over 20-30 years.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

Isn't that the truth!  It was comforting to know exactly who I was, and how I was doing, and exactly what I should do or think at any given given time.

That kind of piece of mind is a rare gift.  Too bad it wasn't real.   I have long since abandoned my search for such a thing, and have decided that I must walk by faith, not by sight.   Although following a man, listening to a man,  and being loyal to a man is easier to do, it just isn't going to work and will result in disaster by and by.

Brent

Dave,

I respect your views.  There is a certain compelling wisdom displayed in what you have posted.  But there are some questions for which I would need an answer before I said that I wholly agree with you.

First, someone might say, "If someone joins a Geftakys group, it means they are the type who was bound to join something abusive anyway...you can't prevent them.  Just leave them alone."  If so, what does that say about us?  We all joined Geftakys groups, even though most of us are out now.

Second, is it not true that any warning given by anyone about this group will probably alienate those inside the group?  Is this not what happened to Brent when he began his website?  Is this not what happened to others who blew the whistle on the Geftakysites even before Brent?  Does the potential for alienation absolve us of the responsibility to sound a warning?  If the answer is yes, Brent should not have begun his website.  Where would we all be if he hadn't?  Consider this also - the warnings being sounded now are not for the purpose of changing the minds of anyone still in a Geftakys assembly.  Rather, they are for the purpose of warning people who might be recruited into a Geftakys assembly.  As far as those who are still on the inside, they have already received as much warning as anyone who's breathing and has a pulse would need to leave a Geftakys group.

Third, is it not true that in the Geftakys assemblies we not only learned wrong doctrine, but we learned an entirely unhealthy way of relating to each other and to the outside world?  The reason why many of these groups are trying to continue is because they can't give up that unhealthy way of relating.  They call it "maintaining the vision" or something similar.

Two last thoughts.  First, you mentioned people like John Kehoe, Gary Halverson, Tom Summerford, Rick Santillan and Gary Wilson.  As far as I know (and I still have access to some reliable sources) these men and their wives have all left the assemblies in Fullerton and Placentia.  So has Danny Davisson.  Those who are left in Fullerton are continuing on much as the body of a chicken will continue to run around for several seconds after the head has been cut off.  But there are groups such as Placentia which are still aggressively trying to recruit people.  Young women are still moving into Jack Hanson's house, for instance.

Lastly, I believe in sounding warnings.  But sounding a warning is not revenge, even though it may feel good.  It is a means of confining a toxic group so that the group cannot cause further damage.  I believe warnings should be given tastefully and credibly.  Therefore I am not hanging around assembly meetings or outreaches with a picket sign and a bullhorn.  I am probably not the kind of guy to take out an ad in the newspaper.  But I do believe in talking to people in the community who have served as prominent points of contact for the assemblies when they have done outreaches.  There will be a point in all this where it is no longer necessary or appropriate to sound a warning.  If anyone can convince me that that point has already been reached, bravo!  I'd be more than happy to occupy myself with something else.  And I'd be the first to admit that maybe I'm missing something that is perfectly obvious to everyone else.  I am not writing this as an argument, but as a request for further enlightenment.  After all, "...I'm just a bus driver...what do I know?" ;)

mithrandir

Yes..I would recommend this when visiting any new assembly / Bible Church/ Gathering or wherever you visit....make sure you have a full comprehension of all the details of every aspect of how that organization is run...top down.  This would make sure that no one in that church has ever failed.  Make sure to do an audit on their spending, make sure that they are worthy for you to give to and make sure that you have input into every aspect of the way they do things. This would be the first thing you do before making a "fully informed decision"  to even visit them.

Does the Lord reign in His House or not?  

Yes, the Lord reigns in His House.  However, He didn't reign in George's house.

Brent

this raises an interesting dynamic i was discussing with a friend the other day. it would appear that several leaders are sticking around out of a sense of duty to those 'sheep' that still want to meet. meanwhile, the 'sheep' keep coming to the meeting out of a sense of loyalty to the leaders who have not given up yet. i think this is a significant part of the dynamic that keeps these groups going, and it dosen't seem very healthy to me. in this dynamic, the leaders are abdicating the decision to keep meeting to their followers, and the followers are abdicating the SAME decision to their leaders. so noone makes the decision to stop, and the meetings shuffle on, but without much vitality. unless george is whipping them into a frenzy every sunday.


the dynamic i outline above is one example of a way sincere and noble motives can lead a person far astray. sincerity can lead to dishonor when it is misguided. i can give you dozens of first-person accounts of situations in which i acted out of sincere faith and yet really hurt people, driving them away from Christ. my opportunities for behaving in this misguidedly offensive way were seriously limited by the fact that i was never a LB. many other sincere people did not (and do not) have this limitation.

as marcia has so recently experienced, the old habits of shunning are hard to break, especially when the persecution mentality is so deeply engrained and inflamed by events this year. how has the way she and others who have recently left been treated honoring to the Lord, even if those still in the assembly are sincere?

but i do agree that we should not call those still meeting evil, satanic, or any other ridiculous, alienating names. they are just people, like you and i, doing their best to live life the best they can (most of them, anyway). i want only the best for them, and i worry about them with a heavy heart. i wish them only happiness and fulfillment in whatever they chose to do with their lives, but i look at the evidence, and i cringe, and i worry that the gatherings that keep meeting will not improve, but rather deteriorate... and if that happens... those poor people...  :(

brian

Golden:  Now, you're being silly.  In most Christian churches, an audit is not necessary as they are happy to provide a financial statement at any time upon request.  In the Assembly we were taught that the more "scriptural" way to do it was to give the money to men without account.  When people found out that the money was not being used in a forthright way, they were hurt and they don't want to be stung by the same practices.

Clarence:  You make some great points.  I'll try and chat more later when I have the time.  I think Golden here just reaffirmed to me that some warnings are indeed in order.

I just want to say that I am being instructed in a meaningful way from Dave, Clarence and Brian.  Not only have you guys challenged my thinking, but you have caused me to change my stance on certain things.

Also, golden was also highly instructive.  As long as there are geftakysservants like that around,  warnings are in order.  

Golden,  you may have noticed that many of us use our names, and tell people who we are, even where we live and our emails, etc.  Do you have the courage to tell us who you are?

Are you able to string together intelligent thoughts, or are you only able to produce silly barbs at this time?

Brent Tr0ckman

I am spinning this off of golden's tongue-in-cheek remark below.

Let's say you entered a building that you were told had Christian meetings on Sunday afternoons.  The following things are true:

1.) The group claims that they don't have a name
2.) They claim to not have pastors, or paid clergy
3.) They have a bunch of books written by one person for sale in the back.
4.) They dress funny, and have large families, with no children's church, nursery or youth program.
5.) They don't have music
6.) Everyone in the place makes a huge fuss over you, pumping your hand and saying,  "Nice to meet you!  Where are you in fellowship?  Did The Lord speak to you?"
7.) Much was made of a person called "Brother Russ."
8.) Brother Russ, obviously some sort of central figure in the group, is referred to as , "The Lord's Worker."
9.) Upon presenting a check for the collection box, you are told,  "We only accept cash."  Upon asking the obvious question about where the money goes, you are told,  "It goes for the work of The Lord."
10.) The women all wear long hair, long dresses, no make-up, and small pieces of cloth on the tops of their heads.

Would you conclude that God reigns in His House and give your cash to these people?  Would you feel comfortable about joining this group, or would you want to know more about them, especially about "Brother Russ?"

If I understand golden properly, he advocates the position that checking these things out is a sign of unbelief regarding God's ability to reign.

Any thoughts?

Brent

21.5 years ago: yes, I did join wholeheartedly.

Now that I am older :) and wiser :) : Definitely NO! I would not want to join. I might want to know more about the group to warn others about it.


Clarence,

I see your point about warning. There's a saying about striking the iron while it is hot (is that the correct saying??). Next year things may have 'cooled' down; this year is the opportunity. You are correct about unhealthy doctrine and relating to one another in the assembly.

A family very recently left an assembly in another locality. We have been emailing each other. They feel very liberated and even the kids are joyfully singing and participating. The kids usually had a difficult time being joyful in the assembly meetings. This family were 'die hard' assemblyites. They practically had to driven out of fellowship, but now they have discovered liberty and freedom to serve the Lord. They are happy.

Another testimony from a different individual extracted from a personal email to me written yesterday:
 I would hate to see pride get the better of some of those[assembly] people, but seriously, sometimes people need to be pried away from something they're attached to, especially when it's gone bad.
Yes, you should!!! You should feel liberated. I do too, but likely not as much as you. It's not like I don't miss some things, but I feel more in control and stronger as a Christian to stand on my own.
The transition is becoming easier. The kids are fitting in. At least here, the kids get some instruction whereas in the assembly, they had to sit still and quiet for more than 3 hours with little to do. That was a little unfair to them. The kids really like it at ?? on Sundays.
--end-quote

I am thankful that I am no longer "IN".

Lord bless,
Marcia

Dave the problem I have with your position is that the great weakness of those around George Geftakys was the way he totally isolated them from the influence and example of other Godly Christians and leaders. He constantly denigrated men orders of magnitude his superior. This was an absolute centerpiece of his strategy for maintaining control. Those so-called leaders who have failed to recognize this simple and obvious fact are showing how little they have learned about what has happened. Where does Mark Miller or any other member of George's inner circle get the notion that they are in any way qualified to shepherd anybody? This is the height of arrogance and self-delusion.  True repentance absolutely required that the care and protection of any of the flock these men felt responsible for be committed to faithful men!

These men need to humble themsleves and get under the tutelage and authortiy of true men of God. Are we all going soft in the head?
By every Scriptural measure, these men are disqualified!
Verne

I absolutely agree with you Verne.  I thought from the beginning that trying to keep things going was and is unwise.  But evil?

I want to be careful here because I do have a tendency to get a little extreme in my speech.
I have no doubt in my mind that many of us George Geftakys surborned had no intention of involving oursleves in some of the clearly distasteful, and yes, evil things that ocurred under George's watch. Whether we were agents or instruments, sad and tragic things took place nevertheless. My hope is God's assessment of my own failure is that I would be worthly of few stripes as one that did not know his Master's will.
The leaders in that system though have another huge problem alltogehter. I have contended elsewhere that it is not possible that the Spirit of God failed to correct and warn these men about the nature of the man Geroge Geftakys and the frightful goings-on in many of the assemblies. I have beeen absolutely ruthless in my indictment of them because they are to be blamed.
what am I to make of someone formerly in leadership under Goerge Geftakys over many decades, overseeing the spiritual overthrow of countless lives and families and now presuming to now in any way be fit to handle the things of the sanctuary? Perhaps evil is not the appropriate word to use here, but I do feel that these men are not displaying the kind of spiritual intelligence and committment to His honor, that one would expect of men who truly love Jesus Christ.

Verne

Existing Assemblies  I have some good news for you all.  The assembly in Fullerton is down to 60 people on Sundays and around 20 to 30 during the midweek meetings, according to one of my sources.  Only a matter of time...

Two other slightly unrelated things  Regarding racism in the assemblies, it is important to remember that according to Colossians 3, all of us who have received Christ have a new identity.  The old identities (Jew, Greek, barbarian, Scythian, etc) are dissolved.  Those old identities would never have gotten us to Heaven anyway, since they were merely different flavors of fallen humanity.  Therefore, it is not my intention to issue a blanket criticism of any class of people.  The thing that's obvious is that the Geftakys empire appeared to be righteous, yet actually embraced almost every conceivable evil.  So it's not surprising that among the hurts they dealt out, racism was one.  It is helpful and gratifying to see how willing we are to understand the particular ways each one of us has been affected by the Assemblies.  I was a victim of racism.  But I did not suffer spousal abuse as the wife of David G (for two reasons, one because I'm not a woman  ;), and two, because I'd have given him a stunning left to the jaw if he'd tried anything  ;D ;D ;D)).  Yet I need to exercise myself in understanding and trying to help each person deal with his or her own particular difficulty in recovering from Geftakysism.  On the same subject, I was already thinking of getting a copy of the book by Chris Rice that Becky Wieser recommended.  But I want to read the book because Chris Rice is also a Christian musician and a good example as a Christian artist, and I want to see how he integrates his art with the rest of his ministry.

The last thing I want to say is that I think we all need a little levity right now.  So I want to ask you all something.  Look for my question under "Another clever riddle."

mithrandir

One characteristic of Geftakysism is 'preserve the testimony at all costs'. This is still being practiced by some of those so called repentant LBs. They counsel individuals to remain in a spiritually abusive environment because the 'assembly' is more important than the fact that the sheep is miserable. They counsel secrecy of assembly decisions because any kind of exposure could give only half of the picture and they would not look good then. Who cares if the sheep is told to bear a burden he/she should never have had to bear? These are the guys who are supposed to be the leaders and have rhinocerous skins. These are the guys who have repented from Geftakysism. These are the guys that Matt P says really love the Lord Jesus. This is happening in existing assemblies to date.
Don't confuse 'desire to repent' with 'true repentance'!

Marcia Marinier

Marcia,

Do you have an example of someone who had been counselled to stay in the Assembly (and not attend another church) even though they are miserable?

A half a year ago, the trend was for those in leadership (and I'm thinking Fullerton) to say "stay or leave, it's up to you."

What specifically is happening now and where?

Isolated in the SouthEast,

-Dave

Dave,

Please understand that I cannot give any more details as I still love these brethren and am loathe to give names etc.

The couselee has left anyway. The counsellor was sad that the counselee did. This happened a little over a month ago.

Marcia

I think one of the most difficult thing that Assembly leaders have to face is the prospect of being another "Joe" in the pew.  In the Assembly, they had significance and respect.  I don't mean this in a bad way.  When we were in the Assembly, we all believe that we were a part of something that was bigger than ourselves and it gave our lives significance.

Now, if they begin to attend the local community megachurch, they know nobody and are nobody.  It will take years to find their way around and rebuild.

Perhaps their motivation to hold things together is not a cruel desire to hold the sheep in bondage.  But, perhaps, they are driven by a fear of the alternative.  Is it easier to believe that they are still a part of this great movement that has defined their lives for the past 20 or 30 years than facing the pain of starting all over?

Hi Dave

Yes, you've got it right.  However, in order to be a "shepherd" of "God's dear people," there must some people to shepherd.  Therefore, a person with this desire has got to have some sheep in the pen.  That is what is going on in the groups that are still meeting, especially San Francisco,  Sacramento,  Riverside,  Placentia,  West LA, Pasadena,  Anandale, etc.

Fullerton is a little different.  They are are on Assembly Hospice, where they are just caring for the terminally ill patient.

Brent

How sad! I do think that you may be right on about this. For those brothers in fear of loosing a place, I offer the following:

For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
Psalm 84:10



Brent this is something of a mystery to me. If these men are truly motivated by a shepherd's desire, what they are doing is the exact opposite of what one would expect. I really question whether the concept of "shepherding" as we understand it finds resonance in the thinking of the men currently propagating the Geftakys phenonmenon. What is more remarkable is the willingness of some to continue to participate! Just my opinion...

Verne

Dave,

I agree that these LBs do not have a cruel desire to hold the sheep in bondage. In fact I truly believe that they sincerely care for the sheep. I think it's more in the line of the old programming kicking in, hence the need for a fresh new environment.

I am attending another church as a 'frequent visitor'. My desire is to observe and learn. But as I sit in the Bible Study I have this strong urge to thrown in some of my old assembly knowledge. When I hear the pastor say 'the body of Christ which was broken for you', everything in me cries out and says "NO! not a bone in His body was broken."

I believe the process of recovery is not as simple as we have the Holy Spirit and the Bible to guide us, so we do not need outside help. Selah.

Marcia

Samuel Ochenjele has been visiting the assemblies (Chicago, WLA, Santa Barbara, Placentia, Fullerton and....?)  His message is the same - "the enemy is sifting...stay true to the vision" With this continuing to be preached how can anyone say that the leaders have good intentions?  The message is that if you leave you have fallen prey to the enemy.  I don't know if Samuel is in this for the money or he truly believes this, but it sure makes me sick.

Last year at a prayer meeting in SLO I learned that Samuel's brother (named 'Sunday') had left the ministry, then returned, then finally left for good.  We were told that he was publicly critical of Samuel and the ministry.  I remember thinking at the time that Sunday must have been a deceived instrument of the devil, just like I thought Brent was.  I hope I'm wrong, but if Samuel is telling people to be faithful to the 'vision' it doesn't look good.  I wonder what the story was with Sunday.

I remember Samuel telling stories in SLO about miracles God did for them in Nigeria.  I do believe God does miracles.  But, if God has so miraculously worked wonders in Samuel's ministry and life, then how did Samuel not see (or not say something publicly about) GG's wickedness?  After all, we all got the impression that God spoke to and led these men in incredible situations.  They risk being killed by serpents and witch doctors according to the stories we heard (in GG's letters).  Why weren't they bold enough to rebuke a wicked man?  Maybe it's easier to see it in a witchdoctor than a false prophet like George.

I post this with an attitude of just asking questions.  I know Samuel has access to the internet (my former roommate emailed him at least once).  Maybe he could post on this board so we could know exactly where he stands.  Does anyone have Samuel's email address?

Jack