Reminiscings & Revelations

[Mark C.]

Good discussion!

  Thank you Dave for taking the time to bring it up and for those that have responded.

The things said on this topic of reconciliation have given me pause, because it challenges some basic assumptions that I have held---- and it's good to consider if one is following good thinking or is clinging to some ideas that are off-base.

I do appreciate the comments that mention me personally and the kind and humble spirit in which they have been offered.  If my "calling" is to bring former members back to reconciliation with present members than I haven't done a very good job of that and maybe I should make some adjustments. 

Immediately, after first leaving the group (before the GG demise), I thought it was my responsibility to inform and entreat the members re. what I believed to be serious errors.  I wrote a huge letter and mailed it to every "Saint" I knew.  The few responses I received were not hopeful ( ) and should have alerted me to the reality that my "former family" were not receptive to correction.

The only positive responses came from those who were thinking about leaving, or already out.  To these, many overcome with great emotional distress, a reasoned argument against their inner debates (filled with all the "inner Wuss" stuff Dave talked about) was very helpful.

These are the ones that I have directed my efforts toward (Wounded Pilgrims) and to whom I feel a very passionate sense of concern for.  I fully realize that there are those who just don't want to talk about it; they don't care what I think, and for that matter are just burned out on the whole thing!  I can understand this, and I wish them all of the best!

Dave S. and Margaret are so wise in their insights, because they (much better than I) have a clear and practical view of reaching those I just mentioned in the last sentence of the previous paragraph.  In my thinking re. "present members" I am thinking of the certain  ones I have had interaction with, and this tends to color my reactions by lumping every single "current member" into that same characterization.

There are dangers, however, in dealing with those have been in cults (or in any kind of recovery), in that we can adopt a kind of detached "objectivity" where we are not clear in defining the absolute necessity for moral clarity (honesty). It is not that I personally need an apology from MM or GG, etc., but it's what they really do need to find blessing with God. 

In the bible story of Joseph and his brethren their understanding and confession to their abuse of Joe was not for Joseph's benefit, but for the unrepentant bros.  Joe had to be "harsh" because, in the bros. minds, they had justified what they did to Joe.  Their consciences had become hardened and the only way to make them sensitive again to their own sin was the work of conviction that would bring them to owning up to their past behavior.

Recovery cannot be accomplished in a moral vacuum where "forgiveness" becomes an action where we support the notion that there was no wrong and nothing to be made right---- again, this is for the one in denial, not for the one they sinned against.  If Joe had adopted an attitude of just "cleaning up his own side of the street" (a very necessary thing) alone with these guys it would have paralyzed him in any attempt to help them.

Dave S. is absolutely correct that we can't allow an unapologetic present member to control our inner state (in that sense we must "forgive and forget").  But to give in to those who would like to rewrite the history of the group, and deny their part in it, we do them a great disservice if we do this.  Whether we like it or not, at some point with our interaction with former/present members there must be a candid, and maybe uncomfortable, talk------ if we are to truly be helpful.  Eventually the doctor treating a cancer patient, with the very best bed side manner, must tell that patient that he has cancer; no matter how emotionally uncomfortable that situation becomes as a result (if we truly care about the patient).

What I have heard from you on this topic is that maybe there is a better way to ease into that eventual needed moment of honest reflection and that I need to work on my bed side manner.

PS to Dave M.---- I live about 45 mins. north of Old Town and will email you so that maybe we can figure out how to make a rendezvous.

                                                                                      God Bless,  Mark C.
   

[Vandyyke]

Thanks Marc, dodn't forget to be "On Fire!"

           

[Vandyyke]

  During my interviews we both recalled how much some of the early meetings had the "feel" of revival.

In fact the Assembly was actually part of something much bigger than itself. All over O.C. people were genuinely getting excited about spirituality. This wasn't legalistic, egocentric, or politically motivated. It was a genuine grassroots movement of people discovering themselves, redefining themselves apart from their parent's generation. I will say it again, The Assembly was part of it!  (George took full advantage of it, capitalized off it! But he didn't create it!!!!!) I can remember attnding a concert at some park in San Dimas in 1976. Mustard Seed Faith played for free, preach the gospel, gave testimonies! It was a tremendously spiritual time! People were walking around in their bell bottoms, holding their open bibles and just shareing the scriptures! As I discussed these things in the presence of teens (the narrator's children) who were raised in the Assembly, I couldn't help but see the puzzelment on their faces,"What are these guys talking about?"   The children born during the late 70's and throughout the 80's know nothing about it!   Sad isn't it? 



See the need for the OHP???!!!!!!

[Mark C.]

Re. The Tapes:  (Please begin the theme music of the Mission Impossible series in your mind before you read this post  )

  I distinctly remember that just after the excommunication of GG a post on this BB reported that Mike Almanzor was involved in a clandestine and successful mission to get all the tapes away from Fullerton.

  Mike took it upon himself to sneak into the tape storage area and whisk them away before Bob Res. could stop him.  Though this would appear to be dishonest, and/or stealing, it really wasn't because the Fullerton ex-communicators of GG would have perverted the true meaning behind the words GG spoke.

  Most would not understand how an unedited tape could twist the true meaning of the words spoken, but that is because of a lack of true Heavenly Vision on the part of those not loyal to GG.  Mike Almanzor demonstrated this "vision" by rejecting the excommunication of GG on the basis that though GG indeed was involved with young women in the group immorally (Mike openly agreed to the charges) it didn't really count.   Why?  because of certain procedural technicalities (read here: "if it does not fit, you must acquit!").

  Mike, Pasadena Jim, etc. now have "lost the Vision", and turned GG out to pasture, so I assume they might be willing to part with the tapes now and sip some wine with us to boot  !!  Yes, I am being sarcstic, but I do recall the above story being told here.

                                                                          God Bless,  Mark C. 

[Vandyyke]

The "Visa" doctrine came up. I remember George talking about how "God has given me a visa!"  As I recall it was a priviledge or reward for being faithfull etc.. I think I left before he developed this "doctrine" anyone want to comment? In your opinion what was he talking about? What were the scriptures used etc...

[Vandyyke]

Visa?

[Margaret]

As I remember it, he meant that he had successfully completed the wilderness journey and God had said, "Well done, here is your visa. Permission granted to enter into the Inheritance." The rest of us were still muddling about somewhere in the desert, and GG said, "I doubt that more than two or three of you will make it." Anyone remember that?

[Vandyyke]

Since you mentioned it, I had almost forgotten the "I doubt that more ..." statement.


    Now that I think about it, he never really elaborated on what  he meant by these things, did he? His method of preaching would be to make an inference, run with it in a outrageous direction and then start hammering on another topic. Yet we were never given any real development on these "missing out on the kingdom" doctrines?

  About 15 years ago I was in a conversation with someone from Dianetics  (I was working across the street from their headquarters in Hollywood and so I went in on my lunch break.) I asked someone to explain Dianetics to me and the conversation went something like GG's preaching. Before I could get an understanding on something the guy was rushing me through it, "You need to buy what I am saying so we can get on to the next level." At that point I refused to go on with the conversation. I wasn't just going to go on "faith" and pretend I knew what was being taught to me.   George worked like this, he would never really explain these doctrines yet once someone takes it on "faith" then they are beholden to them/him.

   

   

[Vandyyke]

Another topic that came up has to do with the fact that, "Along with the growth of Calvary Chapel, Campus Crusade etc in Southern California...so also CULTS were growing!" 

  Here is one that started in pretty much the same neighborhood and time frame of the Assembly!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_God
http://www.exfamily.org/hist/index.html

Teen Challenge at the Huntington Beach Light Club
By 1968, feeling rejected and defeated, Berg, with his wife and four children, moved to Huntington Beach, California to be with his mother. When she died that same year, Berg, who had a talent for reaching the youth, decided to minister what he considered the lost sheep of the counter culture, and began preaching to the hippies.
In the late 1960s, Huntington Beach was to Southern California what Haight-Ashbury was to the San Francisco area: the Counterculture pitted against the Establishment.
Berg won many converts, using his teenage children to bring them to the Huntington Beach Light Club—a Pentecostal evangelical ministry coffeehouse run by the Teen Challenge organization—where they listened to Berg's anti-church, anti-establishment sermons.
Attracted to a non-church setting where they were offered food, shelter and music, Berg gradually developed a small communal group of about thirty-five followers. Berg preached that the end was imminent, encouraging converts to move in with him and devote their lives to Christ, and for the time being, incorporated their hippie lifestyle into his new movement.

[Joe Sperling]

Dave---

The other night, Chuck Smith, Greg Laurie, and Raul Ries were on a Christian television station. Of
course, Chuck Smith founded Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa, while Greg Laurie's church is "Harvest"
in Riverside, and I believe Raul Ries is in Diamond Bar.  But it was actually pretty incredible to listen
to them talk about what God had done since the "Jesus Movement" back in the 60's.  There are now
over 1400 Calvary Chapel's or affiliates--it is truly an amazing work of the Lord. And, of course, each
year they have the "Harvest Crusade" which will be in Anaheim Stadium again this year in August. What
the Lord started back in the 60's has really born amazing fruit through Calvary, and many other Christian
churches since that time.

But since you brought up "cults" it is interesting to note that the enemy always has his "counterfeit"
churches wherever a work of God is in place.  The group you mention below, headed by David Berg was
the "Children of God" (they may still exist in a small way---David Berg having died a few years back) and
were active here in the 60's through the 80's, and then switched to a European focus.  David "Moses" Berg was what is called an "antinomian", a teacher who believes that salvation has no correlation with how one behaves as a Christian.  Since one is "saved" and "forgiven", one can basically do whatever one likes with no repercussions.  Berg literally devolved into a leader who encouraged "flirty fishing", where female members would try to "hook" new "fish" for the group with enticements of sex. One shudders to think of what David Berg will face in eternity for having mislead so many people with his heretical teachings.

It is the opposite of a "legalistic" teacher----the other end of the spectrum, where the Assembly and others are.  With the Antinomians Paul asked "Shall we contine in sin that Grace may abound?  God forbid!"  While with the Legalists (as the Assembly was) Paul asked "Are you so foolish?  Having begun in the Spirit, are you now made perfect in the flesh? (by your own efforts?)"  So, the enemy always has his "counterfeits"--groups that "appear" to represent the true Gospel, but whose teachings are warped far from what the Bible really teaches.   By this I am not saying that the Assembly did not have true christians, or some teachings that were orthodox----they were just "mixed" with teachings which are really not Christian, but are legalistic "hybrids", combining the Law with Grace---whereas antinomianism COMPLETELY ignores the law, and changes Grace into an opportunity to fulfill the flesh. The Lord always has ways of "exposing" such groups for what they are, and often "judging" them in a very noticeable way also.  Both teachings actually "enslave" people----the antinomians enslave people to sin, while the legalistics enslave people through unneeded rules, strict leadership, and through fear.

These groups come and go, but the true work of the Lord continues on silently, accomplishing exactly what He wants it to accomplish.

[Vandyyke]

Yea, I was listening to the WAVE (Calvary Chapel's Radio Station playing the same program) also.


   I don't think cults like the Assembly or the Family could ever develop in our present Southern California society. There were many things about the 60's that provided ripe ground for this type of idealism, "Let's reject the values of our parents generation and let's live for God!" Today Calvary Chapel is a legitimately recognized and respected organization, and rightly so! However, in those early days it would be hard to tell these groups apart! It was a social phenomenon unique to that time period.

  During the "Age of Enlightenment" people like Benjamin Franklin found limitless opportunity to explore and introduce tremendous scientific, political, economic, social advances. Yet at the same time frauds were showing up everywhere.  Quacks like Franz Mesmer found plenty of fools to buy into his claims about "Animal Magnetism". It later became known as "psuedo science". Today people remember Franklin as a genius and Mesmer as a fraud.


   Today Calvary Chapel is not made of of the same demographics as it was when it started out. The people who attended in the beginning were just like the "saints". They were young kids, barefoot, wide eyed, idealitic and open for everything God had for them. Today the attendance is made up of all age groups. The young people who are involved are not going against their parents values. They are going with them. They are respecting the previous generation who ironically rejected many of the conservative values they now embrace!  Instead of living in community, they live in homes with their family where there is a recognized leader (The Dad) who is in charge (hopefully). They value hard work, education good church attendance all for the purpose of family stability.

You may think I am making all of this up. I'm not! I grew up here!  The old timers(Margaret, Marc and Tom) will tell you the same.

[Joe Sperling]

However, in those early days it would be hard to tell these groups apart! It was a social phenomenon unique to that time period.

Dave---

That's really true----and that's why the enemy took advantage of it.  A counterfeiter wants to make
money that resembles the real thing closely enough to pass it off. Back during the "Jesus Movement", people like David Berg could thrive, and unfortunately his legalistic counterparts just a few years later were able to thrive also. They were counterfeit groups we can identify NOW, but at the time were very hard to tell from the "real thing". Have you ever accepted a counterfeit bill from someone because you didn't check it out closely enough?  If you have you know how "ripped off" you felt to have a fake $20.00 or $100.00 that you "accepted" without checking it out.  I think that's how many felt after the assembly came crashing down in 2001.  But at least we can recognize counterfeits a bit more easily now, having accepted one in the past! 

--Joe

[Vandyyke]

 Have you ever accepted a counterfeit bill from someone because you didn't check it out closely enough?  If you have you know how "ripped off" you felt to have a fake $20.00 or $100.00 that you "accepted" without checking it out. quote from Joe


    I don't think it was that easy for people to "check (the Assembly) out".  People in the Assembly couldn't just turn to John 1 and say, "Whoa! the Assembly is a cult!"

    Think about it if you walked up to Chuck Smith today and said, "I think there is something wrong with this group!"  "They believe that Jesus is the Son of God!" "They are committed Christians!" "They worship Christ through the singing of hymns and spiritual songs!"

                        What would Chuck say?  "Whoa! You better get out of there!"?


     We were taught along with all Christians, that a "Cult" is recognized by their definition of "Who do you say Jesus Christ is?". Back in 1985 if you handed Dave Sable a brand new crisp monopoly $500 chances are pretty good that he wouldn't give you any change. Yet I can remember walking along Balcom with him before a prayer meeting and expressing my fears/anxieties about the Assembly. "Dave I think there is something wrong with this Church!" He wasn't convinced. He reasoned with me to look at "fruit" indicators. "We study the Bible!" "We preach the word!" (I think his opinions have changed since then.) Also, I could go to the Christian book store and find literature that identified a cult contrasting it with a genuine definition of Christianity. The Assembly fit perfectly in the latter! We weren't J.W's, Mormons, Hare Krishna's, etc...


   No, I don't agree! It wasn't as simple as just opening the Bible and reading a verse!


  btw I remember a guy named Gary from the San Fernando Valley giving that same illustration (counterfeit money) one Sunday morning!

[Joe Sperling]

Dave---

Actually, if you read my post again you'll see that I was saying that one feels "ripped off"  AFTER they
discover they were given a counterfeit bill without noticing it was one. The point was that BACK THEN
it was much harder to tell a cult from a Christian church as they both "appeared" to be representing Christ.

As you mentioned someone might have accepted a $500.00 bill back then, convinced it was the real thing---however, if they were to look at that bill today they would see it was definitely counterfeit. No one checked out the money closely "back then" to see if they were given a counterfeit bill or not---it was just accepted that it was a "work of God"---that's how David Berg was able to deceive so many people.

--Joe

[Margaret]

I just discovered a really good free online ebook along this line called Dangerous Persuaders. It's only 86 pages, and a quick read if you skip the descriptions of the various groups she lists and the case studies. Basically they persuade us by not fully disclosing what their agenda is. Back in the '70's I think we all sort of assumed that anyone speaking the right Christian language and teaching from the Bible was okay. The author describes in detail how such leaders get us to suspend critical thinking and get manipulated into badly "needing" what they are offering. This book would help anyone keep from being trapped, even during a social phenomenon that is going on.