As a philosopher with a purpose I need to understand xfamily
I have placed my first [and perhaps my only] post here. Regardless of agreement or disagreement over my views, I thank for providing the information in the way you have as a background to "Moses David" or David Berg.

Before I engage in some kind of inquiry, a little background on myself and my objectives might be in order. Firstly, and let me be plain on this, I do not necessarily hold the view that Berg's philosophy was bad. Badly written, yes. Uninformative, yes. However, he was "on to something". It is such a shame that human weakness is such that peer pressure elevates self-esteem. Personally, I don't give a damn whether anyone else likes or dislikes, believes or disbelieves, is influence or remains resolute over my views. They are mine and most are founded on knowledge rather than conjecture. If I could find one word that encapsulates everything evil, it would be "blame".

Knowledge must be based on discovery. Those that are beyond discovery, or should I put more cynically, those who are "above" discovery, base their arguments and actions on conjecture. To encourage a child to blame is the preparation for an adult world which has no knowledge, rather spin, speil and marketing jingles. In that respect, I very much concur with Berg that the sexual evolution begins at birth. With such venom applied to him and his brainchild I am concerned that discovery has vanquished by blame.

For instance, I have noticed questioning the prophet's 'perfect' status, based on the assumption - perfection is to be completely Godly, seems to be one of the purposes of this association. If I may be so bold, the very notion of the 'prophet' is man made. All of the ranting of prophets, which minuscule exceptions, are concerned with human asset protection. The soul is pitched as a greater asset than the body, so trading life for redemption is ok. Thus, like good little Indians, a number of ex-Children of God cult members appear to have traded their lives for redemption in order to accepted by the prophets (society). But prophets are NOT perfect human beings. Not one has been, INCLUDING Jesus. They are derisive, calculating schemers. Every prophet has had a personal agenda.

If we take Mohamed on one hand he only gave God the right to be vengeful, while on the other he celebrated the Medina massacre which could only be argued as gross betrayal. The myths around Jesus are so clearly expunged by Thomas Paine in The age of reason where he argues what kind of God would insist that his son receives a torturous death while giving him the insight in his lifetime? That would be a "hell on Earth" God. Questions about Jesus' TRUE identity become rather more startling. For instance, if he was all knowing and [as we know now] the parousia (second coming) was not just around the corner, why did he record nothing himself? Surely the original (if it were perfect) would be better than copies. Though I don't subscribe to Christopher Knight/Robert Lomas' Hiram Key assertion that Jesus was a "salesman exploiting the underprivileged", their argument that Jesus/Barabas were the same individual certainly is plausible reading Scripture. Was the crucifixion a metaphor?

Clearly, as someone who is writing a book called The Good Samaritan in the Modern Age I have enormous sympathy for Jesus, who had a hell of a job in trying to determine social justice. Luther said he felt "the meek shall inherit the Earth" was undoable, so the grand inquisitor Paul the tyrant came to the rescue.

One of the chapters in my book is title The Perfect Family. Here are the opening paragraphs:

Much has been speculated about Celtic bronze-age folklore concerning 3 concentric circles. Marginally compelling arguments have set the circles to represent Sun Moon and Mother Earth, but few have considered they may be life in absolute simplicity; man, woman and child. The union projecting perpetual existence is not too hard to fathom – the perfect family. But before we go on this outing, we should define the stages of life. A family is made up of members in different stages of their journey. Each creates a unique interaction with the other and reflective each will shape the other’s life. From birth perception is acute dwindling to exaggeration at passing.

A newborn goes through an enormous observation experience; too much even to contemplate its own mortality. Yet after a point, it collects enough data to begin to contemplate perspective and it is about this point that it begins to develop its mask (visual identity). A rewarding time for parents with aspiration, as many young beings will adopt a parent’s mannerism as their cloak. Only when a successful external camouflage has been completed can the young being concentrate on the self. Subjective realisation begins with the conscious attempt to store a memory for prosperity (rather than processing the short-term memory). When this manifests and under what circumstances depends on the individual (Some may have intellectual problems, which will inhibit this stage of development. Yet all souls are intact because you are here to realise and improve yourself. Those with defective bodies will make a new trip). Upon self-awareness the self splits from the mask. Prior to this any young being is technically incapable of deceit. Although how much poor values of peer models reflect on the new being’s behavioural traits must be open to debate. Personal deceit will manifest at the point of awareness as the mask takes a life of its own. Discrepancies between mask and self will later become an important part of our internal review point. Some never learn to resolve those discrepancies, never able to see things “as they areâ€