No Real Changes in the "Children of God" Cult

#12 (CP118), August 1997.

Warning: This newsletter contains sexually explicit language.

Introduction.

In "An Open Letter to All Current and Former Family Members" (12/96, page 2), the Children of God cult (aka The Family) express the hope that we "will try to accept and understand that the Family has changed a great deal over the years" and that these changes are "not for the sake of expediency." When you visit COG's web site or read their recent literature you may feel overwhelmed by the many pages of innocent looking missionary reports of what they are accomplishing around the world. You might even wonder if you are on the wrong web site or you are maybe reading the publications of some other Christian youth group. The purpose of this study is to show that despite several changes in their practices, there has not being a real and fundamental change in the group. I am presenting evidence which I think makes it clear that the Family is still as much of a dangerous and corrupting cult as it ever was. In this newsletter we will show you the story behind the story. We will expose those things the COGs will do anything to keep you from finding out. I will start with a few words about Berg himself, the cult's founder.

Portrait of a Pervert.

The group says Berg died in 1994 and they recently published a eulogy which they also put on their web page where they talk about what a great men he was. In this eulogy they state that "despite all the allegations made by his detractors, the world is a better place because of him." ("David Brandt Berg.1919-1994. A Tribute to the Man, His Mission and His Message" [June 1996], 48 pages, p. 45). These are strange words for a man who started one of the worse if not the worst cult within church history. An honest biography would show Berg was a weak man totally overcome by his sexual urges. Unwilling to give up his lusts and perversions he created a Christian free-sex religion, which is a clear contradiction in terms. Until 1987 when the group cut back on their practice of prostitution the Family was essentially a massive brothel and up to almost a quarter of a million men were serviced sexually by COG's hookers according to the group's own statistics and graphs. Judge Ward of the recent well known child custody case in England wrote about this cult leader, "I am completely satisfied that he was obsessed with sex and that he became a perverted man who recklessly corrupted his flock and did many of them serious damage." (The Judgment of Lord Justice Ward. [Oct. 1995], 303 pages, p. 117). As would be expected there are many things about Berg that they do not mention anything about in the Tribute. Berg was involved sexually with his daughters, daughters-in-law and granddaughters and I recently heard that he was evidently performing oral sex on his step-daughter Techi, Zerby's daughter, as well as Davida, another little girl growing in Berg's household, Sara Davidito's daughter. Berg had incest with his oldest granddaughter Joyanne when she was only five years old. Berg took another of his granddaughters to be one of his wives, when she was 11 years old. The COGs have destroyed some of their own publications lest they fall into the wrong hands. Several of the quotes in this study are from material they tried to destroy during their second purge which is called TS Pubs Purge #2. The following is one of the quotes in this purge from child molester Berg they didn't want you to read. "Come Davida, come Honey. You didn't get you lovin' this morning....Don't stick you knee on it though, Honey, that's pretty hard for it. I love you. You gotta get up like this. I'll show you how the big girls do, see? They get up like this. Now is that good? Do you like that, huh? How's that, huh? Give you a little ride. Feels good! It's good exercise for me too! ILY! XXX! You smell so good! So pretty & so sexy! TYL! Hallelujah! What a Family!" (ML [Mo or Berg Letter] 1281:14,15, [Nov. 81]). In another publication of the same year little Davida is asking to do some sexual things with 62 year old Berg. (ML1338:119, Feb. 81). The above publication contains an account of Berg's 62 Birthday and one of the subtitles listed is "Dito & Techi's `Lovemaking Match!'" Dito or Davidito and Techi are Zerby's two children. Davidito is involved in sexual activity with his half sister Techi on the floor. (See pars 1,2,4,6,7,8,11). In par. 4 Berg says, "Honey...your're supposed to do that in bed!" The most unsafe place for these kids was Berg and Zerby's household. Berg said if he knew what he learned latter he would had developed "a beautiful sexual relationship" with his own mother! ("Sex with Grandma" ML1535:11, Nov. 82). He regretted that during the years he traveled with his mother on evangelistic trips nothing sexual transpired between them. "Nothing sexual however, sorry to say now. If I'd only known what I know now." (ML353:35). There are many videos showing cult women dancing for him and even masturbating to him and he complained once that the dances were too slow as he wanted to reach orgasm faster while watching them. It seems that his favorite sexual activity and fixation was for cult women to regularly perform prolonged oral sex on him. Berg claimed he had sex with the Holy Spirit Who he believed is female and spoke of many sexual encounters with spirit beings which materialized out of thin air. He "had a vision of Christ" having sex "with Mary and Martha." (ML1237:30). "I already told you that the Lord showed me that the Lord had sex with Mary and Martha and probably Mary Magdalene the harlot!" ("Afflictions!" ML569:52). "Why should Jesus have been considered sinful to have enjoyed sex with Mary and Martha?--Which He did according to what I saw in my vision." (ML1237:46). "I know He made love to Mary because I had a vision of it!....I saw Mary making love to Him in a vision I had once right in the middle of a climax!" (ML548:44-48). "Jesus and Mary were enjoying sex....He was so rugged and brown with such black curly hair and brown-eyed, lying there flat on His back with His arms over His head, and Mary was lying beside Him j...ing Him up....He was so dark and she was so fair, a buxom bosomy blue-eyed blonde!" (ML651:45-47). What sacrilege! [Four letter words spelled out in full in original text.] Berg was a self confessed alcoholic and it got to the point where they were hiding wine and liquor bottles from him under his cook's bed. He would often prophecy drunk. Berg predicted that by January 31, 1974 America was going to be destroyed and that the comet Kohoutek was a divine sign signaling that event. His major false prophecy was that Christ would return in 1993. Berg was a false prophet with a betting average of zero. He was also a deceitful man and a lawbreaker as his following advice to his flock shows: "In cases I would say even where perhaps backsliden spouses have refused to give divorces etc., there are lots of places in the world where the preacher wouldn't know that and where they could probably get away with getting married anyway as long as the other spouse could never catch up with them or get the government to catch up with them." (ML1698 DB [Daily Bread] II p.184).

Berg's Writings Above the Bible.

The cult has been supposedly receiving messages from Berg from the dead, as well as from Elvis Presley, Merilyn Monroe and many others. They have been having a major publication push right now to compile all these messages into a book and mass distribute it to the public world wide. In her message Marilyn Monroe is promising the men that she will have sex with them when they get to heaven! Zerby refers to these messages from Berg as new Mo letters! Mo letters are Berg's writings which the cult members consider equal to and in some cases more important than even the Bible itself. They refer to Berg's heresies as the word, in the same sense Christians use that term for the Bible. "I would say that the business Letters and teaching letters are certainly not on the level of the Bible! But I will take those inspired and supernatural and divinely inspired [Mo] Letters and put them on the same level as the rest of the Word of God!" (ML540:4). He would encourage his followers to read his newer and fresher wine rather than the older and more stale wine of the Bible.

Book Burning in the COG.

The group fearing that self-incriminating parts of their publications would fall into the wrong hands have purged and destroyed large portions of Berg's and the group's writings including the Book of Davidito, written by Sara Davidito. Zerby's son Davidito was sexually involved with Sara Davidito the childcare worker assigned to raise him. Berg was very upset and angry and "absolutely sick and disgusted" at a female cult member by the name of Toni for refusing to have sex with another woman, and used Sara Davidito as a shining example of a cult member willing to do anything. (ML721:30, June 78). He said, "How is she [Toni] going to teach children to share...or even teach them sex if she is going to withhold herself like that?" (ML721:43). "I certainly wouldn't want her here teaching Davidito!--What could she teach? Dear Sara his foster mother, teacher and lover is willing to do anything...whether it be to Davidito or to me or the fish [outsiders that members are involved with sexually]...or the brothers or the sisters." (ML721:68,69). Sara Davidito was willing to even let Berg molest her daughter Davida as we saw earlier. Sara Davidito in "The Book of Davidito" talks about her sexual encounters with little Davidito just a few years old. There are many pictures in the Book of Davidito showing Zerby's little son Davidito involved in sexual activity with little girls as well as adult women. See chapter titled "My Little Fish." The publishing of this material raised a lot of controversy. In 1988 the COGs prepared a statement titled "Child Abuse?!" and there is a quote in there by Berg that says, "We do not approve of sex with minors, and hereby renounce any writings of anyone in our Family which may seem to do so! We absolutely forbid it!" When I read this statement by Berg in "Child Abuse?!" renouncing any writings of anyone in the Family approving of sex with minors, it was crystal clear to me that Berg was trying to blame Sara. I was so upset about this attempt at deception that it was a major part of what motivated me to write a 32 page booklet in 1991 titled "Child Abuse?" I could see clearly that Berg was trying to wash his hands, trying to distance himself as much as he could from his own child abuse doctrines and practices by trying to put the blame on Sara who was nothing but an insignificant, super obedient, totally brainwashed childcare worker in Berg's house. Ex-member Ed Priebe former top editor in the cult helped draft this official denial of child abuse and he says it was mostly lies and cover-ups and that Berg was trying to get the blame as far away from him as he could. I was very shocked to read the following relatively recent statement by Zerby: "In 1988, [Berg] went as far as to say he renounced all literature, including his own, that indicated in any way that sexual activity with minors was permissible." (MA298:21, GN653, Sept. 95). It seems to me that the cult is revising their history as they speak. Ultimately only Berg and God know, but even if for pragmatic reasons Berg meant that, something which I greatly doubt, it would had been a lie anyway, because he never renounced child adult sex in his heart. Zerby now is also claiming that they had their literature purges because Berg renounced that literature. The true reason they burned some of their own material however was that they wanted to destroy incriminating evidence. Priebe writes: "In 1991...Family leaders issued a worldwide memorandum ordering Family members to immediately tear up `the Davidito Book', then burn it, so that no copies would exist that could be used as evidence against them." ("Promoting Child Abuse," [1993], 13 pages, p. 2). Priebe's "Promoting Child Abuse" contains a large number of child adult sex quotes from the Book of Davidito. Berg never to his dying day renounced any of his writings, never said he was wrong, or his writings were wrong. They clearly state that their motivation for their second purge for example was to protect themselves and their children. They write: "If some of our meat is choking them, and causing them to choke us, we're willing to let it go!" (TS Pubs Purge #2 Notice, [3/95], 4 pages, p. 2). Let it go, not in the sense that they don't believe it any more of course, but that they are simply taking it out of circulation. They are letting it go because "the System is really weak!" and can't handle Berg's new revelations. (Purge 2, p. 2). It is very clear that they are not purging out all that material because they believe there is anything wrong with Berg's writings. They are explaining to their own people that the reason they are cutting pages out of their books is because of "evil men" and "anti-Christ enemies" against whom they are trying to protect themselves by the purge. (Purge 2, p. 2). It is plain that Berg's followers believe in Berg's writings, be they purged or not. This is very important, one of the most important points, if one wants to understand the group today. There is no doubt in my mind that they still wholeheartedly believe the Book of Davidito for example even though they have taken that book out of circulation. They also believe all of Berg's other diatribes on incest and sex of adults with children like "The Devil Hates Sex" and many other such cult publications. Again let me state my firm conviction that they believe every word uttered by that heretic, Berg. Zerby in a letter to Judge Ward is talking of efforts of "identifying those Letters that still represent Family beliefs and teachings and those that need to be seen in their historical context." (GN653 p. 16). Hogwash! This is an absolute attempt at deception. What is happening now is what Berg talked about in "Maturation of a Movement" where he said "We're going to have to abandon a few things too. `All things are lawful to us, but not all things are expedient!' [I Cor. 6:12] Some of our literature and some of our pictures, and maybe even some of our doctrine and freedoms, we may have to forgo in order to survive." (ML770:65, Jan.1979). He was using in this letter the example of what the Mormons did when threatened by the US federal army to give up polygamy or else. Just because the COGs have destroyed portions of their own literature for self protection, and even if as Zerby now claims Berg renounced some of his own writings, it does in no way mean that they do not believe everything Berg ever wrote. So when the cult tries to distance itself from to Book of Davidito for example by saying that "those pubs were written fifteen years ago and have since been removed from all of our Homes, and have been taken completely out of circulation" one should not pay too much attention to such lying statements and deceitful half-truths. (ML2858:69, GN555).

Berg's Law of Love.

In the "Tribute" they call Berg's law of love, which is the cult's cardinal justification for all their unbiblical sexual freedoms, an "all-encompassing principle" and "the foundation of Christianity." (Tribute p. 21). "Loving consensual heterosexual relations, even outside of marriage, [are] permissible, as long as no one [is] hurt or offended" according to Berg's law of love. (Tribute p.22). They declare, "Many of us could not reconcile the established churches' teaching regarding love and sex outside marriage with our experience of deeply caring and loving relationships outside of marriage, whether sexually fulfilled or not. How could such relationships be regarded as sinful and morally wrong? Could true, sacrificial unselfish love really be contrary to the laws of God?" they ask. ("The Family Answers to Allegations of Sacred Prostitution" [Sept. 1996], p. 1). This of course is adultery plain and simple, according to the Bible. According to Berg however somehow adultery would be considered not meeting someone's sexual needs even outside of the marriage union! We agree with his eulogists when they write that Berg "advanced some tenets that were by any standards quite shocking." (Tribute p. 20). If the COGs want to harmonize the Bible with their law of love they would have to change the Bible quit a bit. For example where Jesus told the woman caught in adultery to sin no more, we should change that to say: "Go sleep around with other woman's husbands but sin no more by showing more love while having sex with those men, do it with more love." Berg theorized that Jesus may had contacted VD from Mary Magdalene. Jesus forgives her for transmitting VD to Him and tells her from now on to get checked for VD more often so she won't infect Him or His disciples again. And in the Book of Revelation Jesus will have to tell Jezebel that He will kill her children if she won't teach her flock to share sexually with more love, since free-sex without love is sin. How insane can you get! This all sounds very ridiculous to the normal, average person out of the cult but not to Berg's followers who daily read his trash with religious and even fanatical devotion.

Better Die than Deny the Law of Love.

In GN554 published in July 1993 Berg declared that he would rather suffer martyrdom and die and lose his life rather than forsake and deny the law of love. He said "There's no reconciliation. It's impossible! Some of our friends have even suggested that we modify our scriptural belief in the freedom granted to us under the Law of Love, to come out and deny it or change it or admit that it was wrong. But how are we going to do that?" Many cult member may some day take the path Berg suggested when he said, "What else can we do?....All we can do is stand up, and go up! There's no way out but up! Death is our only hope." (GN554 July 93). He also said, "So can we compromise?....Can we deny that we really believe this and that? Can't we say we didn't really mean that?....We have to stand up for our convictions of the Truth of God's Word....As Martin Luther said, `Here I stand, I can do no other!'" (GN554 July 93)

"Our Beliefs Concerning the Lord's Law of Love!"

In the same month of July 1993, at a time of major worldwide publicity against the COG and when cult members were denying everything and doing some wholesale lying on TV and in the press, the group published GN555 containing an important letter titled "Our Beliefs Concerning the Lord's Law of Love!" (ML2858). I seems that with all that lying and denying going on, they wanted to make sure that cult members understood that they hadn't forsaken and that they still wholeheartedly believed the Law of Love. The following are some key portions showing again how much the COG believe in the law of love. "In our discussion about the Law of Love at the Summit Meeting, one of the main issues that was addressed was: Does the Family understand that the restrictive sexual policies which we have implemented have not altered our beliefs in the spiritual principles of the Law of Love? Do we - especially our teens & YA - have the right attitude about the sexual liberties that we believe God has given us under His Law of Love? Does everyone understand why certain restrictions have been put in place in regard to our sexual liberties?" (ML2858:9, GN555). "Some have drawn the wrong conclusions, thinking that because we do not practice the same degree of sexual freedom that we did in the past, that we have changed or modified our beliefs in the Law of Love." (ML2858:12, GN555). "So we want to make it clear that...we still believe in the Scriptural principles that the Lord showed Dad [Berg] about the Law of Love, & we believe that these principles are good and right. Even though we no longer practice all of the `all things' freedoms which are our Scriptural right according to God's Word, we still believe in the principles of the Law of Love as much as ever!" (ML2858:14, GN555). "We've also learned that some of our past freedoms were very difficult for a lot of weak and unenlightened outsiders to comprehend. Since the Bible says, `For meet destroy not the Work of God' (Rom. 14:20), we have chosen to discontinue some of the freedoms we practiced in the past, even though `all things indeed are pure.'" (ML2858:20, GN555). "We believe that according to the Scriptures, loving sexual affection [between adults and minors] is no sin in God's eyes. (ML2858:33, GN555). "However, when it comes to any such contact between an adult and a minor, no matter how loving or how helpful or appreciated it may be deemed to be, because it is against the laws of Man in most countries today, we simply do not allow it. In fact, it is common knowledge and it's stated throughout our literature that we excommunicate any adult who engages in such activity." (ML2858:34, GN555). "It's important to understand however that the reason adults would be (and have been) excommunicated...is not because we believe that all such contact is in itself necessarily a sin or crime in the eyes of God. The grounds for imposing such a severe penalty on any adult who has sexual contact with a minor is because engaging in such activity is willful disobedience and flagrant disregard for the policies and rules of the Family - rules which we believe are absolutely essential in this day and age." (ML2858:35, GN555). "Any adult Family Member who has such contact with a minor is not only breaking the no-cross-over between adults and minors rule, but they are also violating the Law of Love itself! - Because one of the conditions that Dad made clear in the original `Law of Love' Letter is that no sexual relationship should be initiated without the mutual consent of all parties involved....And in the case of a minor, the responsible parties would include their parents, Shepherds, etc., none of whom would give their consent if they are faithful and obedient Family Members." (ML2858:36, GN555). They are resorting to taking this indirect route because there is no possible way to say that adult-minor sex in not part of the law of love! The need to use the secondary excuse "disregard for the policies and rules of the Family" as the reason for breaking the law of love, is a glaring and loud indirect admission that the COGs believe that adults having sex with minors is part and parcel of their law of love. "Although we still need to keep the current restrictions in place, [the Lord] showed us that when questioned about our beliefs along these lines, we should stand up and boldly and clearly defend the truth and principles of His Law of Love." (ML2858:56, GN555). "It's not Dad's [Berg's] fault that the majority of the world do not believe the Truth." (ML2858:60, GN555). "To flat our deny them is to do virtually the same thing that Peter did when he denied Jesus." (ML2858:62, GN555). This attitude toward the law of love was very evident during the English court case where the mother seemed more concerned in defending the law of love than in defending her own child. The law of love is where the cult draws the line.

Berg Apologizes from the Dead.

Judge Ward pressured the group to admit that Berg was personally responsible for the child sexual abuse in the group. The group as a direct response to that pressure, conveniently decided to manufacture some messages supposedly from Berg where he is going through the motions of apologizing and confessing about some rather minor things that really don't amount to anything anyway. (MA [Maria] 298:18-20, 34-38, 63, 89-94, GN653). Berg speaking: "Go ahead and show that I should have been wiser, so that you can carry on and move on and more forward." (MA298:20, GN653). Berg speaking: "Don't be afraid to put some of the blame on me. I don't mind. I know there are sometimes things you have to do that you don't really want to do, but sometimes you just have to do them and this is one of them." (MA298:36, GN653). Berg speaking: "Don't deny the Truth-Giver [Jesus], and don't deny the messenger [Berg]. But if you have to poke a little at the messenger, some of the faults and failings, and point some blame here and there, don't worry about it!" (MA298:37, GN653). Berg speaking: "So don't worry that you've got to bend like this. Yes, I know it's a little uncomfortable and it hurts and you don't like to do it, and it really goes against your nature. But you've got to do it, so do it!" (MA298:38, GN653). Berg speaking: "But the Truth is still the Truth, so don't deny that." (MA298:39, GN653). Berg speaking: "It doesn't matter that they want to put the responsibility on me for the Law of Love, and they want me to take the blame for any misuses of the Law of Love." (MA298:89, GN653). We don't know if all this is from the imagination of some self deluded false prophets in the group who think they are getting messages from Berg, or even worse if these are spirit beings impersonating Berg.

Bending vs Breaking.

As we saw in these messages, "Berg" tells his followers that they can blame him a little about some things, but they are directed by him not to deny him. Putting some blame on Berg is considered "bending" as in a tree bending under the winds of pressure and opposition but not breaking. Zerby: "Bending is putting blame on him [Berg], while breaking would be to deny the Law of Love." (MA298:33, GN653). She also says, "In the above prophecies the Lord is telling us not to deny the Law of Love, which of course we can't, as to do so would be denying Jesus' words to love our neighbors as ourselves." (MA298:46, GN653). We clearly see then that denying their law of love would be considered "breaking" or a total compromise and denial of one's own belief, and betrayal. As we said earlier Berg's so-called law of love is considered the foundation principle of their entire cult. If they deny it their whole castle on the sand will collapse and every justification for every unbiblical sexual deviation they believe and practice will crumble to dust. There never was even the slightest hint or hesitation in the cult's writings dealing with changes, that the law of love is something they still believe in very very much. As we saw, the group went out of its way to make it clear to their members and others that the law of love remains the doctrinal cornerstone of the cult. One thing that is absolutely clear in reading all this literature is that they still very much believe in Berg's law of love and in Berg himself.

No Apologies for the Law of Love.

According to the group's way of seeing things, many of the crimes the Judge condemned the group for, they don't see anything wrong with at all. It is part of the law of love. As far as Zerby and the cult members are concerned, their thinking has not changed at all. Some of the more extreme cases of child abuse that the Judge exposed were, according to the group, not a reflection on their law of love. What they really believe and are trying to convince us is that the problem was not with the law of love itself, but rather with the fact that, as Zerby puts it, cult members in some case "have violated the...Law of Love." (MA298:3, GN653). This has always been their line. "There was - and is - absolutely nothing wrong with the freedoms that the Lord gave us. The Lord showed Grandpa [Berg] that the scripture, `All things are lawful unto us', (I Cor. 6:12), literally means exactly what it says; that there are no exceptions, all things indeed are lawful for believers in Jesus who are motivated by love." (ML2718:15,16, GN486, Nov. 91). "The problems resulted because a lot of us abused these freedoms and began looking on them as a means to gratify our own fleshly lusts instead of using them to sacrificially and lovingly help others." (ML2718:20, GN486). Also "If there was anything wrong it was that some Family members may have gotten into some excesses and taken things to the extreme in some cases, using such liberties as an occasion for the flesh". (Judgment p.111). "We realize that there were some instances in which some individuals did not always strictly follow the principles and guidelines of the Law of Love and in some cases some of these liberties unfortunately were used as an occasion of the flesh....We are truly sorry if any of our members were hurt or offended in any way by someone who misapplied or in some way strayed from the strict guidelines of the Law of Love." (Judgment, p. 110). "So to anyone, young person or adult, who due to Dad [Berg] or the Family's exploration of the Law of Love, feels that they were subjected to inappropriate sexual behavior of any kind...we sincerely apologize." (MA298:53, GN486). Zerby says it pains her to hear of the hurt people have experienced because of the abuse of the law of love. (MA298:3, GN486). "I'm sorry - very sorry - for our past failures and mistakes and shortcomings....Please accept my humble apology. I ask your forgiveness. (Open Letter p. 4). However in all the dozens of times they are apologizing, they never once apologize for the law of love itself, but rather for the misuse of the law of love. The cult has been apologizing all over their publications and also in person for misuses of the law of love, but never for the law of love itself. That translated from cogese into plain English means: "If your father or mother had incest with you in the cult when you were a child, if adult cult members had sex with you when you were five years old, and it was done not in a loving way, we apologize, not that it was done, but that it was not done in a more loving way." What the COGs would consider sexual child abuse would be some form of undue harshness and inconsideration or cruelty demonstrated during child adult sex. For the reader who does not really know the cult as much as we do, the above statements may sound like an exaggeration, he or she may think I am being unfair and that I am just trying to be as critical and negative as I can. But that is not the case at all. This is exactly how the cult members think to this very day. They do not consider child-adult sex abusive. They believe that there is nothing wrong with having sex with a child. They are saying the following to teens but the same applies to children as well: "You can be very thankful for the honest, open and loving attitude towards sex that Grandpa [Berg] had taught us in the letters....If you were actually mistreated or hurt in any way, we're certainly very sorry about that." ("Don't be Ignorant of the Devil's Devices" [June 1990], as quoted in Judgment p.106). It is suggested to the members to forgive each other for such past abuses of the law of love. It is recommended that this is done only verbally however and only to those who are nearby. "We do not recommend that you write to others about things of this nature." (Judgment, p. 110). Of course! They wouldn't want all that incriminating evidence out in the open.

Self Incriminating Statements.

We know the COG enough to know that whatever applies to teens as far as sexual freedoms also can apply to children. Please bear that in mind as you read the following quotes where the general nonspecific term "minor" is used. Using nonspecific terminology is a COG trademark. In "Flirty Little Teens Beware" because teen girls were sexually provoking adults as they had been trained to do and did not now understand why sex with adults became all of a sudden wrong and even a cause for excommunication, Zerby tries to explain to them the facts of life and the reality of persecution. She says: "This is the very thing the system would like to use against us - sex with minors which they always term child abuse although in our loving Family there would be very little possibility of genuine abuse." ("Flirty Little Teens Beware" [Oct. 1989], as quoted in Judgment p. 104). The clear implication of the above quote by Zerby of course is that the COG does not term child adult sex child abuse. Judge Ward pointed out that the above is "a worrying disingenuous statement based upon the totally flawed belief that if done in love in accordance with the law of love, sex with minors (child abuse) is not capable of being abusive." (Judgment p.104). In "Don't be Ignorant of the Devil's Devices" (June 1990), it says: "In the past, before our hypocritical enemies started slinging all their child abuse accusations at us, we enjoyed certain God given liberties and that natural attraction occasionally did lead to some involvement and affection shown between some of our adult men and teen girls and the same thing occasionally took place between some teen boys and adult women." And "Intimacies or loving relationships that may have taken place in the past were [not] necessarily all wrong, wicket, sinful or of the devil! That is simply not the case." They stopped because the system is "making such a big stink and getting so freaked out and infuriated about anything they even suspect may be child sex abuse." (Judgment p. 105). In "Why Do Ye Stone Us?" it says: "If someone were to specifically ask us if any intimate contact between an adult and a minor is inherently wrong...we would have to honestly answer `no'...`All things are lawful' unto us according to God's Own Law of Love.'" Berg said "We certainly do not condone not approve of child sexual molestation, exploitation or abuse....We've also had to go so far as to ban any non-abusive contact with minors which could be construed as `abuse' by the System!" ("Why Do Ye Stone Us?" ML2835:63, July 1993).

The Abusive Law of Love.

The law of love itself is abusive and not just the abuses of the so called law of love. They need to apologize for their law of love which is the real cause of the hurt and damage of so many lives, which law they still believe in and would rather die rather than deny. We gave up our lives of sin and sex as well as our careers and possessions to join what we thought was a Christian group to serve God, but the group eventually reintroduced us back into a life of sin to a greater degree than that many of us had been involved in and had experienced even before joining the group. I haven't heard and I don't expect any apologies about that since they not only still believe free sex to be part of their law of love but they are openly and proudly practicing it to this day all over the world. The last time I met the COGs in person was when I went to confront them at a college classroom here in Los Angeles where they had been invited to speak about two years ago. The first thing they started their program with was an open and boastful admission that they practice free sex in the group. I was shocked. They can't repent of something they consider part of the liberties granted to them by God through the law of love. It is obvious that the COGs are not apologizing for turning so many members who gave their all to follow Jesus Christ into prostitutes working in escort services as common whores for money, since they still glamorize prostitution and see it as part of the law of love. The COGs have built this huge heretical wall of partition between themselves and the rest of the Christian world by believing all this nonsense about the law of love. They are on top of this partition wall waving a great big flag blowing in the wind with "Law of Love" written all over it, and are at the same time apologizing and asking for forgiveness and inviting us to communicate with them, have a reconciliation party, etc. But they can't have it both ways. As long as there is no repentance and the COGs have not completely and utterly rejected and forsaken their law of love there can't be and it is ridiculous to even talk of any true reconciliation between them and us. In a meeting attended by both members and ex-members in July of 1997 in Maryland, USA for the purpose of reconciliation, the following opinions were expressed, "Some of us have some different doctrinal disagreements, but....we shouldn't let...some of these doctrinal disputes keep us from working with each other at all." (NDN [New Day News] Vol. 3 #1, [August 1997], p. 8). Someone wrote to the organizer of this meeting, "You truly are being used by the Lord to help `break down the wall' and unite us all in Christian love and fellowship. (NDN Vol. 3 #1, p. 15). During the meeting they "read the famous, `Love Never Fails,' talk from [their] beloved David [Berg], a letter on which all could agree and unite." (NDN Vol. 3 #1 p. 3). There are many major problems with this picture!

Child Adult Sex Part of the Law of Love.

Zerby is absolutely lying through her teeth when she says: "Of course we understand, and have made it quite clear that the Law of Love does not include adult sexual contact with children." (MA298:33, GN653). "We do not believe, however, that these freedoms extend to adults having sexual contact with minors, as is evidenced by our rules against it." (MA298:45, GN653). The truth of the matter however is that the cult's so-called law of love as defined by them absolutely, definitely and certainly does include adult sexual contact with children. Berg himself clearly stated that when a question related to this subject came up. In a question and answer publication that was supposed to be cut out and "burned as soon as possible" (see Purge 2 p. 2), the following is question 51 with the answer from Berg. "Question: My little boy (5 years old) is very sexy! He cannot even hug his mother without getting a hard on. So I thought it was bad because it makes him too familiar with his mother if she takes care of him. I believe somebody else should take care of him, but until now, no one in the Home has the burden to do this. What do you, Dad [Berg], think of this kind of mother & child relationship!-Sammy, Europe. Answer [from Berg:] What's wrong with it? It's perfectly natural!--What better person to learn about sex from than his own dear mother?--God's only Law is Love! (See Nos. 605:4, 779, 782, 815 & SD "My Little Fish")—Are you a jealous father?" ("Answers to Your Questions!--No. 5", ML1458, GN BK [Good News Book] IV, p. 27). If Berg believed child adult sex is a freedom granted under the law of love, Zerby and the group believe the same. It's as simple as that. And though they supposedly don't practice child adult sex, they still believe in it. Because they believe in the law of love. If someone did not read these apologies carefully, did not read between the lines and did not read between the lies, may get the impression that they have repented of child adult sex when such is not the case at all.

Judge Finds Child Abuse Widespread.

Unlike other less incriminating practices the group has always used very careful language when talking about the subject of child adult sex, choosing many times to lie outright about it. They have claimed that child adult sex did not happen, or did not happen widely but only in rare instances where some marginal, misguided or unwise members misinterpreted Berg's writings. Or they blamed some old hippie cult members in some mountain commune in some far away field of some far away continent for been responsible for the supposedly few isolated cases of child-adult sex. They lied about this for years until they got put against the wall during the court case in England and were pressured to be a little more truthful about these matters and were forced to go through the motions of admitting to some wrongdoing on Berg's part. But they are still very careful about this topic as can be expected since they are in danger of spending the rest of their lives in jail for being responsible for the sexual molestation of an entire generation of little children as well as teenagers. In France recently an ex-COG member got 19 years in prison for sexual abuse of his daughters and his wife got 3 years for not exposing him to the authorities. The plaintiffs were the abused daughters. His lawyer said that the COG had turned him into a child-molester. Poor guy. He had probably joined out of a sincere desire to serve Jesus. I wish it was Deborah and Faithy, Berg's two daughters, that took their parents to court back before the group ever started instead, and it was Berg who got 19 years and his then wife Jane Miller aka "Mother Eve" 3 years for not exposing Berg. If they had done so, maybe there would had never been a cult by the name "Children of God." Zerby writes that "lit was published that challenged the barriers between adult/minor sexual contact, opening the door to some members crossing over that barrier." (MA298:51, GN653). It would had been more accurate and honest if she had said that these cult publications and heretical doctrines broke down and destroyed all barriers thus opening the floodgates to not just some, but to great numbers of adult members who abused thousands of little boys and girls. Judge Ward said: "I am totally satisfied that there was widespread sexual abuse of young children and teenagers by adult members of The Family." (Judgment, p.111). "They have been rightly vilified by the media and pilloried by the press for it." (Judgment, p.112).

Two Cases of Child Abuse.

The following is a rare case where a Family member tells exactly how she feels about child adult incest. A mother in the group with two husbands said on one occasion "My three year old, is - is quite open about sex. She goes around masturbating and she has had oral sex with my other husband." "Oh, yes" she continued "there's nothing wrong in this at all. This is quite normal." (Kaj Moos Hansen "Save Our Children" Forlaget Havmaagen, Seagull Productions P. O. Box 843, DK-8600 Silkeborg, Denmark, [1993], p. 150). A woman with two husbands at the same time is quite normal in the COG. It doesn't matter if there isn't a single example of such a relationship in the entire Bible. It's part of their law of love. Here is another account by George who said to a reporter. "You see, you don't seem to understand, you see, you - I don't know, you're - you're talking like an outsider....We are all the children of god, you see. I mean, it doesn't matter how - how old you are, or how - how developed you are, I mean, I know a - - I've seen it in my own experience, sexual relations with a man and - and his little daughter, and I've seen it and she was young....Nine years old." The reporter then asked about sexual activity between children. "Between child and child?" George replied, "Oh, yes, yeah. I mean, toddlers - toddlers, yea. Tha-that's nothing." ("Save Our Children," p.150). (In this book Mr Kaj Moos Hansen has plagiarized and used without my permission most of my booklet "Child Abuse?")

Lies, Lies and More Lies.

Zerby is trying to blame it all in not explaining things better in the past. She says "When Dad first introduced the concept of sexual freedom to the Family 20 years ago in 1974 with the Letter `The Law of Love,' he did give some restrictive guidelines as to its use. They were, however, quite general and subjective instead of very explicit like our current rules are, which are clearly listed in the `Fundamental Family Rules.' With 20/20 hindsight we can look back and see that it would have been better to explain things more clearly. We should have anticipated potential problems and put in more stringent rules to keep them from happening, including prohibitions on all adult/minor sexual contact. By not having such restrictions in place, some people were able to act in ways that were harmful to others. Because of the insight Dad gave into the Scriptures which granted us a great deal of sexual freedom, without clearly stated explicit restrictions that prohibited all sexual activity between adults and minors, it resulted in actions that caused harm to some children....Today it's easy to see that it was wrong not to put explicit restrictions in place earlier, but Dad didn't see the need for such explicit rules when he first introduced sexual freedoms." (MA289:15-17, GN653). "Dad" didn't see the need for such explicit rules for the simple reason that "Dad" didn't see the need for such rules! The only reason Berg did not see the need is because Berg did not see that there is any such need. The only possible need for action by Berg in relation to the practice of child adult sex in the group would had been the possible firing or demoting of those who might had been hesitating and dragging their feet about this practice and possibly ended up loosing their jobs and positions like the 300 during the RNR who were demoted for not pushing prostitution and free sex faster. The above is a classic piece of COG deception. It is not even worth responding to. It is an insult to our intelligence. You will notice as you read COG statements and apologies that they use slippery, evasive expressions, words that can have more than one meaning, and you will find a general lack of clarity, firmness, certainty and specificity. Let me assure you that this is not coincidental, or due to lack of an ability to express themselves more clearly and precisely. The choice of words and phraseology in general, is part of a deliberate, planed and well calculated attempt to deceive. But part of the above is not even that. It is a straight our, black and white type of an open lie. Zerby is trying to deceive us that had Berg known that there would be child-adult sex he would had put safeguards against it. What a lie! It's like saying a wolf would had built a fence to protect the chickens from the wolves. Berg knew everything. Berg started and initiated everything. He is the one who preached and propagated it, and we have the documentation to prove it. Berg's and Zerby's house was where it all happened first before it was filtered down to the rank and file, and the rank and file had to basically do, like the good and obedient soldiers they are, what was in no uncertain terms expected of them, namely to have sex with children. It all first happened to little Davidito, Zerby's son. It all started with Berg's family and Berg's household. Words can't express my disgust in this total lack of even a shred or an ounce of honesty and true integrity in all the pronouncements, statements and claims of the COG. They just believe they can make any claim, lie all they want, be as deceptive as it gets and get away with it. They don't know how not to go too far with their lying, I guess. Anybody who knows the COG well, will learn to not pay any attention to the wholesale lying that is going on to this day. We heard of a professional court psychologist who said after examining dozens of COG members that he had never in his professional life met any people with such an ability to lie. They are lying every inch of the way. I can honestly say that I have never met liars like the COGs in all my life. Priebe disclosed that in 1989 "Zerby had [him] write a class to teach COG children to lie." ("The `Children of God' - Cult of Sexual Abuse, Psychological Terror and Coup Attempts" [March 31, 1993], 27 pages, p. 27). I recently heard that the COGs pressured this then cult member to go to the police station and lie that her husband had threatened to kill her. I first heard the story from the husband. I double-checked the story with his wife who told me that yes it was true. She went to the police station accompanied by two other cult members, but when the time came to lie about her husband like she was instructed to do by the cult she just couldn't bring herself to say that her husband had threatened to kill her. What monsters. It would had been better for Zerby not to apologize at all than to be going through the motions of asking for forgiveness, but without any true and deep sincerity. She also does not miss a beat in her futile efforts to defend her cult by accusing ex-members who testified against the group in the English court case of exaggerating and lying.

Child-Adult Sex Stopped Not Because it Was Wrong.

Sometime during the mid-eighties a internal document circulated in the group, one per each home, to be read to all members and then burned. It was a brief note. Former members have talked to me about this single page leaflet signed by Zerby where she talked to them about the problem of adults having sex with children. According to what was clearly communicated to me by the ex-members who talked to me about this secret internal memorandum, Zerby was not saying that it was bad or a sin for adults to have sex with children. The ex-members who talked to me about this, explained to me that the problem was not with children having sex with adults. It was clearly communicated to me that in this message from Zerby they were not saying that there is anything wrong with adults having sex with children. They stopped it or cut back not because they thought it was bad. So presumably they may still be doing it, if they feel safe that nobody will find out. I am convinced that Zerby and her group to this day believe that there is nothing wrong with child adult sex. [Does anybody out there have a copy of this document? Do you have any clear recollection of what exactly was contained in this document? What was the specific reason given for needing to stop child-adult sex? We would also be grateful for any other information you can provide us with on any issue related to the COG that you think is important enough to publish.] Zerby says that in 1986 child-adult sex became an excommunicable offense. In May 1987 however the COGs published a book called "Good Thots" where we find the following statement: "Many researchers maintain that adult child sex is basically harmless to the child." ("Good Thots" Vol. 2, par. 27, pp. 1499, 1500). It is very clear that even if they have completely stopped child adult sex, something for which we can not be sure, they still believe in it 100%. They consider it a freedom granted to them by the law of love.

Homosexuality in the COG.

Zerby continues "It was during this period that [Berg] wrote Letters which removed other barriers as well. He explored the possibility that a mild degree of male with male sexual activity, i.e. masturbation, between adult men could be allowed under the Law of Love, as he explained in the Letter "Homos". (MA298:50, GN653). Can you imagine! By the way, what Zerby refers to as mild degree of homosexuality included not just masturbation, but also oral sex between men. On the front cover of the Mo letter "Homos" there is a drawing of a man performing oral sex on another man. What business someone who claims to be a Christian can possibly have exploring God forbidden, perverse homosexuality! Berg did some exploring of his own as well when he performed oral sex on cult member Timothy Concerned, Techi's father. The only form of sexual activity where Berg went back and forth, showed any hesitation at all, as far as his blanket application of the law of love, was in the area of male homosexuality. I don't remember where Berg ever hesitated so much and went back and forth like he did about this issue. Even he must have realized he was going too far. He suddenly demonstrated a sensitivity to scripture that is quite a departure from before. He says: "The Scriptures in both the Old and New Testaments are definitely against it." ("Homos!" ML719:43, June 78). "Homosexuality was the sin of sodomy for which the ancient wicked cities Sodom and Gomorrah were totally destroyed." (ML719:44) "It was forbidden by the law (Deud. 23:17), and Sodomites were considered a curse (I Kgs. 14:24), driven out (I Kgs. 15:12 and 22:46) and their houses destroyed (II Kgs. 23:7)!" (ML719:45) "Romans 1:27 makes it quite clearly a sin." (ML719:46). "I think you're treating on rather dangerous and uncertain ground, I know I am, even to discuss it." (ML719:39). He could had made a U turn at this point but he didn't. "But I still know the Scripture is true and all the All Things Scriptures are true, and the Law of Love is true." (ML719:39). "Nothing that is done in love is wrong." (ML719:22). "I presume there could be exceptions to the rule." (ML719:40). Berg takes then the big plunge and tries to create a big distinction between anal male-with-male sex on the one hand and on the other hand "merely masturbating each other and s...ing each other off." (ML719:21). Having traveled on that heretical road that long he couldn't stop and did something that is unheard of. He said Rom. 1:27 is for anal sex (ML719:19), and went on saying that masturbation and oral sex between two men if done in love is part of the law of love!! In March of1980 the following answer is given to this question concerning male homosexuality. "Q. Is masturbating between males included in the Biblical prohibition against sodomy and anal intercourse of one male with another? A. Men merely masturbating each other and s...ing each other off, this doesn't really seem any different than having women do it for you. I'm just not convinced definitely by the Lord yet that this is permissible, although He did say that `Nothing that is done in love is wrong'. I guess we'll just have to say, `according to your faith be it done unto you'." (ML816-2, Vol. 7, p. 6249). The Bible's teachings on sodomy and homosexuality and the prohibitions related to it are about male-with-male anal sex but not about male-with-male oral sex according to the group. There is no way on earth to scripturaly reach the conclusion that oral sex and masturbation of man with man is a form of homosexuality that the Bible does not condemn. I do not know the details, but oral sex and masturbation between men though part of the law of love is not practiced in the group any more. If it is, it is not done openly. In "The Devil Hates Sex" they mention that male homosexuality did not bear good fruit! Zerby says male homosexuality was rescinded, and gives ML792:48-52 as reference.

Lesbianism.

In a 1996 cult publication we read that lesbian relationships "of two girls cuddling, or a woman having a threesome date with a man and another woman, etc., if they so desire" is not prohibited. (FSM287, "Charter Questions and Answers Part Two," DO, [Feb. 96], p. 4). On page 139 of the Charter it says: "The Bible specifically prohibits male-with-male sexual activity, but there are no passages forbidding such activity between women....[So] we do not entirely prohibit all female-with-female sexual activity....It would therefore be acceptable for two sisters to...kiss, caress...each other...sexually....Of course, such female-with-female cuddling would need to be conducted in the non-public areas of the Home, just as any other sexual affection would....If two women have the need for affection between themselves, since it is not Biblically forbidden, we should be loving and mature enough to understand." I would like to first ask them why is it that they allowed male homosexuality in the first place, or to use their terminology, why Berg "explored the possibility that a mild degree of male with male sexual activity, i.e. masturbation, between adult men could be allowed under the Law of Love" if as they now state above "The Bible specifically prohibits male-with-male sexual activity"? It is also plain nonsense that lesbianism is not forbidden in the Bible. One must be totally blind not to see the clear meaning of the passage that deals with this issue. The Bible says in Romans 1:26,27. "God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." No difference exists. Why would female homosexuality be considered OK when male homosexuality isn't? If it's OK for women to kiss and caress each other sexually, then it is OK for men to kiss and caress each other sexually as well. If lesbianism is practiced, then male homosexuality should also be practiced. They must be so very blind not to be able to see the contradiction. The Bible by using the expression "in the same way" militates against such interpretation and allows no such distinction between male and female homosexuality, period. Lesbianism is practiced in the group to this day. A horrible extension of this way of thinking has made it possible for mothers to have sexual involvement with their own daughters. I have also heard of cases of sodomy of little boys by adult males including by their own stepfathers.

Bestiality.

What I am going to say next will come as a shock but maybe it shouldn't. When a well traveled Christian author and missionary that I know told me that COG members had been involved in bestiality, I couldn't believe it. I wrote back to ask him again, and double-checked. He wrote back to me again and said that yes it was true that he had met a farmer in Switzerland who had opened his farm for COG members to stay. This farmer told this missionary that the COG members that were staying on his property were involved in bestiality with his farm animals. This is still too hard for me to believe, but then why would the farmer say that? I am willing to give my informant's name and phone number to the proper legal authorities for further investigation of this very bizarre and shocking story.

FFing After 1987.

Even when the cult's hookers were contacting VD in epidemic proportions Berg still refused to stop the practice. See Berg's incredible letter on the subject titled "Afflictions". But when one or more members died of AIDs they cut back greatly. They did not stop completely having sex with outsiders however. In my booklet "Searching for Seleste" (32 pages), pp. 25, 26, I have presented clear proof showing that they did not stop completely in 1987. They made it very clear that there will still be sex with some outsiders. They were to continue having sex with some of their most important "friends." They were to use condoms with these outsiders. They termed this change of policy "The Condom Revolution." The so-called condom revolution, or this new requirement to use condoms, was at that time only when having sex with outsiders, not when having sex with other people inside the group. Presumably they may still be sexually servicing many top men in various countries and this could be part of an explanation of why the COG can get away and continue to operate in countries around the world even after all the bad media publicity, the raids and the court cases. In 1984 Berg admonished his hookers to go after the city fathers and important men. He wrote that in some countries COG girls "ffed top government officials who have it turn defended and protected" the group. He said, "See, once they have ffed some of these government officials, they not only win them, but they also win their favor and their influence and protection and defense. But also in a way the government officials have to defend us to defend themselves for fear of exposure! Once they have done it they have done it, and they can't very well accuse us when they were involved." "So that shows you what one of the most important effects...of ffing is, it can protect the whole Family in a whole country. I don't think you can possibly underestimate, or you shouldn't the value and the effectiveness, the influence and the importance of ffing....for defense, protection and giving us freedom and liberty to operate within a country." "Our ffers are our most powerful lobbyists! They literally lobby for the Family with government officials and men of influence. They had better get up to the top where men of influence can defend us and protect us when there is trouble, and trouble always comes!--at least they are on the inside and can warn us! (ML1755:1-20, [March 1984], as quoted in "Prostitution and Political Seduction - A History of FFing" by Ed Priebe, [1993], p. 7). I wonder how many politicians, judges, generals and other important men have gotten sexually involved with COG prostitutes and they are now forced to protect the group because of their interest to protect themselves and their own reputation. This practice of using sex to influence important people is nothing new for the COG. Roy Wallis, an English researcher who wrote extensively about the COG, I was shocked to find out was also involved sexually with them. That he was ffed is an absolute fact. It was common knowledge. He was having sex with a cult woman by the name of Niomie Caravan, the wife of John Caravan. This happened in San Francisco and the ex-member who gave me this information was also in San Francisco at the time.

FFing Cases After 87.

The COG ffed their lawyer in Australia in 1992. This information comes from one of the experts during the English court case, David Millikan. They cannot possibly accuse him of being an enemy or lying. Millikan wrote in a computer message in November 96, "I know of at least one lawyer in Australia who was `flirty fished' in the last four years." That means 1992 or five years after 1987. I, Sam Ajemian, personally know of actual cases of sex with outsiders here in California as late as 1993. I am not making up stories. I know for a fact that they were using sex to gain converts as late as 1993. I know about these cases and some of the gory details. Also in a CAN meeting that took place in 1993 in Minneapolis, USA, COG members were confronted by ex-COG members that they still practice prostitution. "Yes we do, but we are now doing it out of our own free will", was their surprising answer. The following is an excerpt taken from "The Family Answers to Allegations of Sacred Prostitution" clearly showing that the cult is not telling us the whole truth concerning sexual relationships of members with outsiders. "Prostitution Forbidden to Members of The Family. The official Position and Policy Statement on Attitudes, Conduct, Current Beliefs and Teaching Regarding Sex issued in 1992 by World Services on the collective behalf of The Family states in clause 16: Prostitution. No member of any recognized home or community in our fellowship shall be allowed to engage in any form of sexual prostitution. This policy is further reinforced by the fact that all member homes and communities voluntarily agree not to have sexual relationships with non-members, under penalty of excommunication." (Sept. 1996, [2 pages] p. 2). But as we saw earlier the COGs were ffing as late as 1993!

COGs Proud of Prostitution.

In 1993 they wrote: "The overall fruit of our FFing ministry was tremendous! (ML2858:23, GN555). "There was nothing wrong with it and it's certainly nothing to be ashamed of! To the contrary, we should be proud of it!-God's proud of us for doing it!" (ML2858:24, GN555). "The Letters and the spiritual principles behind FFing are as true today as they ever were!" (ML2858:25, GN555). "It is true, we have changed some of our practices of the freedoms granted under the Law of Love, but just because you don't practice something doesn't mean you don't believe in the general principles behind it! For example, we still believe in the principles of FFing just as much as we ever did." (ML2858:63, GN555). You should read "Flirty Fishing-The Inside Story. One Man's Personal Experience" by Bart and the "Night that Changed my Life" by Juan Amado, both published as late as 1995, to see how much they still believe in ffing. In "Introducing FF Testimonies" (LNF 3/95) it says, "Ffing was a wonderful ministry that the Lord led Dad [Berg] and the Family to engage in" which shows again how much they still believe in it even though they don't practice it on a wholesale scale like they did in the past. How can the group claim they have changed when they talk in such glorious terms about all this prostitution in the name of Jesus Christ? On the other hand I was told by an ex-member that came out recently that in 1996 someone in the group asked if it was OK to ff and Zerby said no. I do not know how to harmonize this information with the rest. One possibility is that this statement was made for external but also internal consumption, the cult hiding the truth even from their own members, something not uncommon at all in the cult. One thing is clear. They continued ffing after 1987 and they still wholeheartedly believe in it.

Free Sex Practiced to this Day.

First of all there isn't much difference between sex with outsiders and sex with members. In both cases it is sex outside the marriage bond, and whether or not it is done between consenting adults makes no difference at all as far as the Bible or God is concerned unless the consenting adults happen to be married to each other. As even a ten year old who has read the Bible can figure out, the word of God does not allow and completely forbids any so-called "exploration of the law of love" outside the marriage unit, period. Berg said that the prohibitions against sex outside of marriage are the result of the "perverted religious thinking and misinterpretation of the Bible." (ML353:35). In the late seventies Berg fired 300 leaders because he felt they were too slow in allowing the members to indulge in free sex and prostitution. This is called the RNR. They write "It was this very reluctance of a number of top Family leaders to obey the FF letters that caused Grandpa [Berg] and Mama [Zerby] to take a closer look at our Family leadership's spiritual condition. ("Questions & Answers on Sex, Freedoms & Relationships!" ML2718:73, [July 1991], 14 pages.) "We had [the] RNR revolution in the Family and got rid of all those leaders who claimed, `Oh well, I believe it, and it's all right for others, but it's not for me.'—We've now replaced these disobedient leaders!" (ML721, June 78). "And among the liberties granted to our homes worldwide was the freedom to freely and lovingly put into practice the Lord's Law of Love, and to thus ensure that all of our adult's sexual needs were finally met." (ML2718:76). As Zerby admits the RNR was a wild time of a lot of sex. She adds that because of immaturity and selfishness some cult members got hurt. It's the same refrain. It is always somebody or something else's fault, not the fault or result or consequence of Berg's heretical law of love. (For a while the Family was lying that the COG dissolved during the RNR and the Family was basically a new group. They still try to perpetuate a distinction between the two calling the Family, "a successor movement" to the Children of God and referring to the COG as "the former organization." ("The Family Answers to Allegations of Sacred Prostitution" [Sept. 1996]). As you can see above, it's the same group. The only thing that happened is that Berg fired a large number of people.)

Free Sex Age Lowered to Sixteen.

It was shocking to hear that during the time they put the charter together, they lowered the free-sex age to 16. (See GN649 "Teen Sex Policies!" and GN657 "Go for the Gold!") Sixteen year old teenagers can now have all the sex they want with others 16 to 20 years old. This of course is not like outside the cult where you have to work hard to get a date and work harder to get further! We are talking here about easy sex, sex on demand, a different sex partner each day if so desired. I think you are getting the point. The following quote from a letter I received from an ex member who left the group recently shows that getting involved in free sex is a requirement, and not just an optional choice or something you simply volunteer for only if you want to. "Just last spring, when Angela (she had only just turned 16) was at the HCS [a cult school in Japan], Ruth one of the leaders at the HCS admonished Angela, then corrected her, to have sex with any one of the multitude of young boys who had been asking her to! Ruth told her, `You're selfish. What's wrong with you? Just trust the Lord!' What Lord? The God of flesh and licentiousness?" He also wrote "In a new Christmas CD on the back side there is a picture of Ruth, who is a teen shepherdess, child-care overseer and just a plain old pervert. Why don't they have Ruth in that non-existent outfit she wore on the strip-tease video ten years before?" (Personal letter, 1997). This lowering of age to 16 is a surprising development since it seemed with the court cases and raids and investigations etc., that the group was trying to become or at least was trying to appear more mainstream! It is interesting to read the reason why 16 and 17 year olds could not have sex before the Charter. "Because the system is so very freaked out about any kind of sex involving minors, we've been compelled to enforce a strict `no sex' policy for all of our teens who are not yet 18 years old." ("Questions and Answers on Sex, Freedoms and Relationships!" ML2718:149, GN486, [1991]). In other words there is nothing wrong with people younger than 18 having free sex, participate in sex orgies, be part of sex schedules, impregnate other people's wives or get pregnant from other women's husbands. In "Go for the Gold" (MA302 GN657, [Sept. 95], 48 pages), Zerby instituted some further changes along the lines of free sex among teenagers. These changes are not the kind that you would expect if the COG were really trying to become more conservative. I will quote some of the important but sometimes confusing passages from this relatively recent letter with some added explanations as needed. Prepare to be shocked. Zerby says, "The Lord is happy when you senior teens [16-17 year olds] - like other unmarried people - share love in whatever way you desire, according to your own faith. For example, you can continue mutual masturbation dates for as long as you wish and stay within the Lord's highest will." (MA302:314, GN657). In the past unmarried people when having sex were expected to go all the way and risk pregnancy. Now they are free to satisfy each other sexually in other ways and still be pleasing to God! Imagine another Christian missionary group where one of its members reports the following about his church's youth group. "Withdrawal seems to be a very common thing amongst our young people. This is where two people f..., but the man pulls out at the last minute....Or he just puts the penis in and they f... for awhile, but then he takes it out and they do other things...to achieve orgasm." (MA302:413, GN657). Or imagine an unmarried Christian missionary asking his leader, "If I'm single and I choose to only have limited sexual fellowship, will the Lord be angry with me, that I don't want to go all the way?" (MA302:344, GN657). The following is Zerby's answer. "The Lord is allowing sexual fellowship other than intercourse for singles without it being considered a lack of faith or less than His highest will." (MA302:374, GN657). Again: The Lord "is graciously allowing the blessing of limited sexual fellowship (mutual masturbation or oral sex), without it been considered birth control." (MA302:337, GN657). Let me explain what is going on here a little further. Up to now people were expected to have full intercourse when they were sharing sexually, but now with the winds of change blowing in the cult, they don't have to. They can just only masturbate each other and perform oral sex on each other. Some change! This may be an important change for women in the cult for example who don't want to get pregnant when having sex with someone who is not their husband, but this change hardly makes the cult any less cultic. The COGs attribute these "changes" to none other than Jesus Christ Himself. The following sacrilegious messages are supposed to have come from the very lips of Jesus, things that are totally unbiblical, and completely contrary to what He teaches in the Bible. The cult's Jesus says: "If you're at least willing to give in some way to fill the [sexual] need of another, then I will count this as righteousness, I will count this as fulfilling My Law of Love." (MA302:435, GN657). [Jesus:] "If two pray and discuss and decide ahead of time that they will not have full union, that they will not have full intercourse, but they will give and share love in other ways, and if in the course of their lovemaking he places his penis in her vagina for the pleasure, for the unity, for her desire, yet he comes to orgasm with her hands or with her mouth, this is within the alternative lovemaking which I have allowed." (MA302:421, GN657). Here you have it, folks, the latest from Jesus on oral sex and masturbation. It is explained elsewhere in the text that if there is no prior decision not to have full intercourse and the man pulls out the last minute to avoid pregnancy, that is not considered God's highest and best, it is considered a form of birth control. "Jesus" again says, "You may love with your hands and love with your mouths, and may kiss and caress and rub and go [have an orgasm] and enjoy the ecstasies of the flesh....that you may fulfill My Law of Love." (MA302:121, GN657). [Jesus:] "Those [singles] who desire to receive love and to be comforted and to be close to another, but they do not desire to be beholden or attached to a married couple....Their desire is not to be in a threesome or to be attached to a married couple [and] they seek their own mate....I have allowed this dispensation of grace [masturbation and oral sex] that they might be able to receive the love and comfort and warmth that they need without fear." ( MA302:422, 437, GN657). In case of pregnancy of an unmarried woman who had multiple sex partners, (something very common in the group), Zerby says: "Someone should be willing to take responsibility should she become pregnant....If several men are willing to take responsibility for the baby, then the woman would have more choices." (MA302:369, GN657). "If two [single] people decide to f... and a pregnancy results, the Lord usually prefers that the couple involved marry, for the sake of the child....[But it] does not mean that the men would be forced to marry the single mothers in the case of pregnancy. It is still a personal choice." (MA302:361, GN657). (Prophecy: ) [Jesus speaking:] "Whether a woman becomes one with one man or with ten men, someone should be willing to take responsibility." (MA302:372, GN657). [Jesus:] "Realize that whether there be one man or whether there be many, someone should be willing to take responsibility." (MA302:375, GN657). [Jesus:] "If a woman has been with many men and only one man is willing to take responsibility in the end, then that is your man." (MA302:373, GN657). "For some who have borne a child, it is My will that they would be together....But for others, I have released them from the responsibility because I have another plan for them, and I will supply the need of that child in another way." (MA302:384, GN657). "If these couples are willing and agree together to give My Love to another in need, this is great in My Kingdom....This is the way of perfection in My Kingdom." (MA302:429, GN657). "There will be those instances where it is My will to bring three together as one family...the man, the wife, the second wife." (MA302:397, GN657). "There will also be instances where I bring three together in friendship...the man, the wife, and the other woman who is as a friend and a helper and a lover. There is great variety of relationships in My Kingdom. There is great variation of bonds, some more permanent than others. Some are only for a time, some are for a lifetime." (MA302:398, GN657). In ML1338:120 (Feb. 1981), Zerby asked Berg "What do you think about threesome, by the way?" and Berg replied "Oh I think threesomes are wonderful! I think foursomes and fivesomes are even better!" What actually Berg believes is that everybody is married to everybody! "When a married woman receives seed and conceives a child outside of the marriage union, this is a blessing that I have bestowed upon her and her husband. I have blessed them for their giving, with the fruit of her womb. Even though the seed has come from another, this baby is still the child of the husband and wife. This baby is part of their happy family, to be loved and cared for and parented as the other children, so that they might be one and united and strongly bonded as a loving, happy family - all united to daddy, and all united to mom, and all united to Me." (MA302:404, GN657). [Jesus:] "There is not a need for a second man to join this union, unless they [the married couple] feel such a need for his sake." (MA302:407, GN657). (Dad [Berg] speaking to Zerby in prophecy [from the dead]:) "Just because a man has fathered a child with his own seed, just because the child is his flesh and blood, doesn't mean that that father needs to be completely obligated, or that he needs to see that child as his own....That's the whole principle of `One Wife.'" [One Wife means everybody is married to everybody. One big happy sex cult.] (MA302:408, GN657). What all this means is that at 16 girls have to perform oral sex or masturbate any men who asks them between the ages of 16 and 20. If she gets pregnant there is no guarantee that he will be considered the father or marry her. Even if she knows who the father is, a volunteer may replace him as the father. If she gets pregnant from a married man she can become part of a threesome for a time or a lifetime or she may be considered just a lover. If a 16 year old man has sex with a married woman and she gets pregnant from him, he can't even become part of a threesome unless they want him. His child is not his, but the husband's. Imagine growing up in this crazy, crazy environment. This is a daily reality for thousands of teens.

The RNR Generation.

These 16 year olds we are talking about here were born around 1980, many of them a direct result of the RNR's free sex and prostitution. The few years prior to 1986 were the worst as far as sex with children, incest etc. Berg said about the kids growing in the group. "They've been experimenting with sex ever since they were born. (ML1398 DB I, p. 593). "Sex is something they've known and enjoyed all their lives....ever since they can remember." (ML1682, DB II p. 174). "They've seen us f...ing or making love etc. It's no big deal. (ML1922, DB II p. 568). These children grew up in a very sexualized atmosphere and that's putting it mildly. They have experienced things that even adults in normal society have only heard about. There were videos now destroyed showing orgies of adults with kids present. Kids were getting red eyes from herpes they contacted in the cult's swimming pool where semen was floating from all the sex that was going on inside the pool! Only God knows how many of these little children were exposed to venereal diseases of all kinds with all that sex going on all the time. Sexual play started with these kids since birth during diaper changes by their mothers and sexual activity with their own mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters, etc., was commonplace as these kids were growing up. In the Philippine videos there is a father talking to Berg via video testifying that his 11, 12 year old boy had sex with his step mother who is also shown on the video with her husband and step son, everybody smiling happily. There is a section with a little boy of 11 singing with 4 totally naked adult woman dancing next to him. In another section of the Philippine videos one big breasted adult female does a strip and then hugs a 12 year old. There are strip tease dances performed in a large meeting with many very young children watching the show. There are many strip dances performed by little girls of about 11 and even as young as four. Berg's granddaughter Joyanne was involved in prostitution in the group in her early teens. Another very young girl had to provide sexual favors to a man who was providing shoes to the Family in Pakistan. If all the truth was known there are probably many cases of prostitution of such minors in the group. I know cult mothers and can name them by name that had incest with their own son and/or daughter. Many of them were in sex schedules as kids and many have experienced the horrors of victor camps, the cult's detention and brainwashing centers. They grew up thinking that all of the cult's beliefs and practices are normal and natural. Young ex-members have said this very thing talking about their childhood in the cult. They did not know there was anything wrong with these things until they left the group. After having left the group and taking to other kids her age at school one ex-member realized that what she had learned in the cult was not normal. It all felt very natural. They might as well had been born and raised on planet Jupiter. This is what the group designed for them and hoped they will turn out to be like, as the following cult quote shows. "These [young children] are the ones in which the Law of Love shall truly be fulfilled for they are unharmed by the World. They have not been perverted by the World and its ways." (ML2858:83, GN555). The direct result of this kind of upbringing does not of course stop after these young people leave the group. For example about half a dozen young ex-members that were born or raised in the COG are now working as strippers and prostitutes in London, England. The cult's fruit! One of these ex-COG member strippers in London is Davida mentioned earlier, Sara Davidito's daughter, a clear consequence and result of growing up in Berg and Zerby's house and getting molested as a child by child molester Berg. The children in the cult who are now about 16 years old are told even through direct prophecy specifically addressed to their age group from Jesus Christ Himself that they can perform oral sex and masturbate each other or have full intercourse with anybody from 16 to 20. As if that isn't bad enough the cult published a 7 part series of letters titled Loving Jesus. In these recent publications the boys starting at 14 years old are encouraged to use sexual language with Jesus, to picture themselves as women, visualize themselves as having vaginas, masturbate to Jesus and imagine Jesus' penis penetrating their imaginary vaginas. Have you ever heard of anything like this in all your life? This is so shocking to me that I had to see the letters before I fully believed all this was true. It was very hard for me to believe that the men in the group would actually believe and be doing such things. For more information about this latest madness from the COG please see newsletter #10 "Sex, Sin and Sacrilege - Zerby's Dirty Revelation" and newsletter #11 "More Madness from Mama Maria." Please be forewarned that these two newsletters contain sexually explicit language.

No Real Changes.

Zerby is so far gone, so desensitized, she can't really understand how concerned we are about these children in the cult. She is resentful that the grandmother thinks of the cult as the most horrible environment for a child to grow up in. Well, it is. She thinks that these minor changes in the charter and her superficial apologies will make everybody so very happy. At the same time they were organizing the charter, they were also experimenting with the Loving Jesus sacrilege. Just think, dear reader, as soon as things started cooling off for them after all the investigations and court cases Zerby started experimenting with loving Jesus in a sexual way, proving behind peradventure of a doubt that they haven't changed. I mean, if anything, they are getting worse instead of getting better. She wrote Judge Ward, [We] "have admitted to past mistakes and oversights on our part. Our earnest hope and prayer is that the Family provide the best environment possible in which all our members, young and old, can worship and serve our Lord Jesus Christ." (GN653 p. 17, [Sept. 95]). "We sincerely believe that the Family today is a safe place, and we have established safeguards to make sure it will remain so." (GN 653 p.14). She writes the Judge that her cult has not always been a safe place for children, but now it is very safe. She says "I am absolutely convinced that the Family is a very safe environment...for all of our children. (MA298:28, GN 653). This letter to the Judge was written Sept. 1995. By this time Zerby and Peter were deeply engrossed in Loving Jesus in a sexual way and had already written and sent out to the cult Parts 1 and 2 of the Loving Jesus series in July 1995, or about two months before the letter to the Judge! I can just imagine them Loving Jesus and doing all these insane things and then getting out of bed and writing the Judge that letter. I really don't understand what they are talking about when they insist that they have changed. Where is the change? As for the COG been a safe environment for children, how can Loving Jesus be considered safe? What safeguards is Zerby talking about? What absolute, wholesale rubbish. No my friends, the COG has not changed. How can they even be pretending that they are serious about change? How can they possibly be claiming that they have changed? How dare they tell us they have changed a great deal? What other conclusion can one reach? Like someone wrote to me after reading one of my Loving Jesus newsletters: "They are still the same!" Berg's granddaughter Joyanne, after a visit to the cult a couple of years ago said to me that the group is not changing, they are waiting for us to change, for society at large to change, for the world to become a safer place for a cult like theirs. The following two quotes are, the first an introduction from Judge Ward which I think very accurately describes the COG and the second from an ex-member girl born in the group, KJ. Judge Ward: "Those of us who heard [KJ's testimony in court], those of us whose hearts are not frozen by prejudice, whose ears are not deaf to things they do not wish to hear and whose eyes are not blind to genuine tears, we will remember that young woman breaking down in the witness box and through her sobs crying out:-"If it's changed so much, how can it have changed? This all started with David Berg. He's the one who decided it all. It's all his prophecy, so how can he suddenly change it all. Is he saying it's all wrong, saying that he made a mistake?....Has he done anything to help to stop the suffering that has happened and is just going to keep going on because you suffer it all you life. How can it have changed? It's changed on the outside so that we don't persecute them. It hasn't changed his heart. It hasn't changed his mind. It's just made things more covered up, more secretive, that's all....He hasn't said sorry for any of the things he started in the first place. He hasn't done anything to correct them to make them right. How can you say it's changed? People are still suffering for what he's done to us. It'll be with me for the rest of my life, I know that. Every decision I make, everything I do. I still have phobias, phobias about men." (Judgment p. 118). The Judge added, "I make no apology for repeating and adopting this passionate declamation."

Conclusion.

Based on the facts presented in this study I can say without any fear of contradiction whatsoever that the COG is basically still as much of a dangerous and perverted cult as it ever was. They have been forced in the last 10-12 years to cut back on some of their worst excesses or even maybe stop or at least pretend to do so. But they have not changed in their belief system. That is the message of this study. They have not stopped believing the garbage Berg has fed them for a quarter of a century. Until Zerby and her cult realize that they are very wrong and bow their knee to God's will as is revealed in the Bible and they repent of their heretical doctrines and completely and utterly forsake their unbiblical practices, it is ridiculous to even talk about change. No there is no real change, there has been no real change and there will never be real change until the COGs repent. Will they repent or will they go to their graves in their sins like that heretic, Berg did? Let's hope they repent, let's pray they change. But until they do, let us not be naive and uncritically believe what the cult is dishing out to us. If they ever repent it will be so evident, so easy to see, they will not have to try to convince us that they have changed. They believe Berg's heretical law of love and they are not going to give it up. They consider us unenlightened conservative old-bottles that can't take their new wine.

Save the Children.

The Family has been forced to put some breaks on their abuses partly due to those concerned enough to try to do something. God only knows what the group would had degenerated to uninterrupted by persecutions, media exposures, raids, expulsion from various countries, court cases, imprisonments as well as opposition from those of us whom the cult calls "detractors and enemies." The few changes that have taken place obviously are not enough. Progress has been made but we have a long way to go. It is an epic job and just a few of us can't do it. Will you help? Will you take up the torch in your part of the world, you country, your state, your city, your community? God help us all to do our part. Do we even have a choice but to intervene in this madness, try to alert the media, contact the police everywhere and do anything that is in our power to do? My God what is going to take for more of us to wake up and get involved? The cult is a danger not only to society but primarily to their own members, a very large number of whom are young people and children. There are thousands of young children in this cult that need to be rescued now! With so much sex going on, the group is like a baby factory and huge nursery. As of September 1995 there were 3.200 children 10 years old and under in the group. As of January 1997 there were nearly 13,000 members with "about 4,500 adults, 2,700 teenagers and 5,800 children." (The Family - 1996 Annual Activity Report). Many of the adults mentioned above were born and raised in the group. These children and teens and even these totally indoctrinated young adults need protection from the government, the churches and other concerned individuals. These kids are some day going to point an accusing finger at our lethargic faces and will demand to know why we didn't do more to rescue them. We must protect these kids from their unfit parents and unfit leaders. We must come against the cult with all the force of the legal power at our disposal, not in violence, not by burning down their compounds, but with maturity and wisdom as godly men led by the Spirit of God. The legal authorities have the God given responsibility and the God ordained authority to interfere and rescue these children. As for those thousands of child molesters in the cult, they need to finally be brought to justice. They must be held accountable for their crime of corrupting these multitudes of children, starting with Karen Zerby herself first.

Available from CounterCOG.

You may obtain a copy of The Judgment of Lord Justice Ward (CP111) though our ministry for a donation of US$30.00. To secure you copy of the Loving Jesus package (CP116), a very important set of cult publications, please send a minimum of US $22.40 or 10 cents per page. Prices include postage and handling to any part of the world. To receive our newsletters please send a donation of $10.00 for the next 5 issues. You can send your $10.00 subscription fee anytime during the year and you shall receive the next 5 newsletters. Older newsletters are available at $2.00. Please feel free to photocopy and distribute these newsletters as is, to as many people, church organizations and government agencies as you like. We need your financial support for the ongoing work of CounterCOG. Please send in your generous and much needed contribution today. In ordering materials or if you like to help with a donation to support our ministry please make your checks payable to Sam Ajemian. For more information or if we can be of any service to you please feel free to contact us my mail, phone or e-mail. We would love to hear from you. Please pray for us.

Copyright (C) August, 1997 COUNTERCOG, P.O. Box 40242, Pasadena, CA 91114, USA
Tel. (626) 794-1408
E-mail: CounterCOGI@compuserve.com