Existing Assemblies

[jackhutchinson]

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)?

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

[Heide]

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

[al Hartman]

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

[David Mauldin]

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.

[Luke Robinson]

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. WEE HEE HEE HEE!!!  They're coming to take me away, ha ha...
   
Luke

[MGov]

It appears that several people in St Loius are indeed still meeting! I am given to understand that the witness and testimonies of the web site have been rejected by some there as being false and Satanic. The manner of departture of some of the leadership is cause for great sadness and confirms many of my own  my long-standing assumptions about many involved in leadership with George Geftakys...the day will declare it...
Verne

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

[Will Jones]

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.

[MGov]

Luke,
...

As you said, the list could go on.  And your comment about this BB becoming a cult is simply laughable… and plain dumb.  

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

[Will Jones]

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.    

[MGov]

Hey MGov:
Any possibility that we are getting a little bit sensitive here?  I see absolutely no malice in what Will says here. He probably thinks some of my cosmological musings are as "dumb" and I would not be in the least bit offended if he said so. Lighten up will ya?
Verne

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

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.

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

[Matt]

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?

[editor]

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

[Bluejay]

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???
 

[editor]

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.

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

[Arthur]

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

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.  



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.