The Definitive Story Told

Inside a New Age Mormon-Essene Fertility Cult

Chapter 2

From Esoteric Mormonism to Occultism

It is the belief of the founder of Sons Aumen [Ahman] Israel (SAI) that Mormonism was but a vehicle to assist orthodox Christians into the occult in a systematic and smooth fashion. For this reason, he maintains, Joseph Smith organised two churches - an outer 'exoteric' (public) Church (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) retaining the basic elements of Christianity and an inner (secret) 'esoteric' Church (the Church of the Firstborn or Church of Enoch) [8]. teaching the "higher" occult mysteries which only the spiritually initiated could comprehend. The inner Church recruited members from the outer Church possessing the spiritual qualifications to make the major religious paradigm shift from Christianity to the Occult, the intent being that the core leadership of the Church should be occult adepts. Joseph Smith's embracing of Free Masonry, adapted by him to create the Mormon Temple Ceremony (which has undergone a number of revisions over the past 150 years, progressively expunging more and more of the occult elements), was a very clear sign that this was Smith's aim.

To his credit, Gilbert Clark discerned Joseph Smith's real intentions long before Mormon scholars finally tweeked what was going on (though anti-Mormons had long pointed out the occult roots of the LDS faith). In the autumn/fall of 1994, Lance S. Owens published a treatise [9] that caused a veritable earthquake in Mormon scholarly circles, which was also published in an abridged form by the author [10]. The articles trace Joseph Smith's involvement with the occult from his youth and demonstrate the powerful influence of Free Masonry, but particularly Kabbalism/Qabbalism (the Jewish equivalent of Western occultism) on the theological development of the Mormon Church. As this essay will attempt to show in outline, Gilbert Clark is the true inheritor of the Joseph Smith tradition, taking Mormonism to its natural conclusion.

Because of the secrecy surrounding Smith's inner Church, it is not surprising that it experienced violent schism after his death. We must remember that those in the outer Church believed that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was a restoration of pure Christianity. That is not to say that all or even most of the early Mormon leaders knew exactly what Joseph Smith was up to. As one reads the writings of the early Mormon hierarchy it is clear that Joseph Smith did not complete what he set out to do and that what was left was a half-way house mishmash of Christianity and the occult. That Joseph Smith's successors did not clearly understand what the founding Prophet's final goal was is evidenced by the progressive abandonment of the "meatier" doctrines of the early Latter Day Saints including mixed (polygynous/polyandrous) marriages [11], blood atonement, polytheism (infinite number of gods), oathes of vengeance, baptism for the dead by direct revelation, etc.). Interestingly, the modern LDS hiererchy never addresses these issues nor attempts to exercise its claimed apostolic mandate to resolve the doctrinal controversies caused by schismatics bringing these doctrinal issues up but seems content to allow lay members to write private, unofficial rebuttals.

The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS) made the cut with Mormonism's occult roots in the 1860's and may (until the liberal reforms of the 1960's) be regarded as a 'pure' Restoration 'outer' Church lacking nearly all the early Mormon esoterica barring the concept of "priesthood authority" even though this was substantially redefined in the liberal reformation of the 1980's.

Like most occultists, Gilbert Clark (aka 'Davied Israel') believes in the doctrine of both biological and spiritual evolution (though in the beginning he denied any belief in the former to me as he knew I was a firm Creationist). Spiritual evolutionists believe that light and truth have gradually been distilled upon mankind over many millennia and that religions have been created by the gods ("Ascended Masters" - supposedly spiritually enlightened men and women who have passed into the spiritual dimension where they guide human beings in their continuing journey) in specially adapted forms to enable man to understand. Because of the presence on the earth of a few 'enlightened' ones, these Ascended Masters supposedly created simple exoteric traditions containing myths simple to understand but simultaneously organised special secret orders to train the more spiritually advanced. An analysis of all the main world religions reveals that each has a secret esoteric tradition (e.g. Sufism in Islam) built on a doctrine that is common to all which we may broadly define as "pantheism" (the core doctrine of the New Age Movement), the belief that there is no ultimate personal "Father-God" but rather an ubiquitous, impersonal "energy" which permeates everything in the Universe. This energy, to borrow George Lucas's representation in Star Wars , is simply the collective force of all living things - past and present- which survives the death of the physical body and which inherantly possesses some sort of "immortality". Pantheists believe that this 'collective energy' is 'God', and that therefore everyone is 'God', only he (or she) has not necessarily realised that yet. They believe that the whole universe is in a state of evolution and is progressing to an ultimate state of 'Nirvana' (transcendant bliss following absorption into an impersonal whole) which individual humans are slowly realising over aeons of time through large numbers of reincarnations over millions of years. It is my belief that this was the true belief of Joseph Smith and that it lies behind the teaching of the King Follet discource which he gave shortly before his assassination [12]. Early Mormon concepts of an infinite number of gods may be said to be a mutation of this pantheistic doctrine re-clothed in Christian terminology. After Joseph Smith's death, Brigham Young tried to perpetuate this teaching of gods-without-number but the Mormon Church has since abandoned that and moved back towards orthodox Christianity in its current paradigm of three Gods (recent definitions of the Godhead by Mormon apologists indicate that they are moving away from this Tritheism too). The Reorganized Church rejected the multi-god thesis from the beginning, first returning to Kirtland Ditheism (Joseph Smith III) and then later (in the 20th century) to classical Trinitarianism.

The shifting sands of Mormonism's doctrinal mix reflect a conflict between two streams of thought, Christianity and occultism. Whereas most Latter Day Saint denominations slowly retreated back to more orthodox Christianity (the RLDS Church moving the fastest in this respect), a few splinter groups like Bryant's Patriarchal Church of Christ (later becoming the Church of the New Covenant in Christ, an openly Gnostic body) and Gilbert Clark's Sons Ahman (Aumen) Israel sought to take Joseph Smith's "Restoration" to its ultimate conclusion, in much the same way that Joseph Smith - working on his early 'outer church' - took the Presbyterianism of his youth to its complete blossoming in the (unsealed portion of the) Book of Mormon. As we examine the latter's theology we will see that Joseph Smith created a 19th century version of Hinduism with a layer of Christianity painted on the top.

Current "Official" SAI Beliefs

Posing as an investigator in the summer of 1999, I entered into a correspondence with "Davied Israel" (Gilbert Clark) to find out what the current 'official' beliefs of his organisation were and found that over the decade since I had known him personally that he has become much more public about his occultism and distanced himself entirely from orthodox Christianity and almost completely from Joseph Smith's exoteric Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. In my first letter, which he replied to on 15 July 1999, I asked him 10 key questions (§1.1-1.10), followed by sub-questions and another 10 questions (§1.11-1.20). All my questions appear in standard face and all his answers in italics [13].

1.1. What is the name of the God you worship?

1.2. Could you tell me a little more about the Heavenly Parents you believe in?

2.1. How do you determine what is true and what is not?

1.3. Do you believe that Jesus Christ will physically return to the world?

1.4. Which is more important for you - your feelings or a revealed Word?

1.5. What is the difference between objective and subjective truth?


1.6. What is your view of married life and the family?

1.7. How large is your community in Arizona?

1.8. Is it true you were once called Sons Ahman Israel and that you are a break-off of the Mormon Church?

1.9. What is your connection to the Evangelical Church of Christ?

1.10. Do you accept any of the Hindu scriptures like the Vedas?

1.11. What is your eschatological teaching regarding the final outcome of this world?

1.12. Do you believe in a personal devil called Satan?

1.13. Which Bible books do you consider to be the purest?

1.14. In reading a site by a man called "Absalom" I came across a scripture called the "Writings of Moroni" by someone called Pratt.

1.15. I noticed that you use a scripture called the "Gospel of the Holy Twelve".

1.16. Do you believe in reincarnation?

1.17. I am sorry to have taken up so much time with my questions but I am very interested in learning how people differentiate between objective and subjective truth. It seems to me that what claims to be "objective" is little more than the personal, subjective opinions of people. It concerns me that the world has been left with so many different writings that none but the most intellectual can possibly sift through them all and come to any kind of reasonable conclusion about the universe. I believe in God, and I believe that He loves everyone and desires them to be saved. The trouble is that people have different acumens and all can't be expected to wade through different traditions.

1.18. How do you believe we will be judged at the last day?

1.19. How does a man know where he is supposed to be religious-wise?

1.20. How does his choice of religion affect his future in the eternal worlds?

In my third letter to Gilbert Clark I tried to narrow him down even further in his answers, and attempted to get more detail to the 20 points above. He chose, instead, to give a general reply, ignoring questions he did not wish to answer. His reply follows (in italics) and the several paragraphs have been numbered for easy reference. I have added my comments under each section (in ordinary typeface):

21.1. Aumen, our Heavenly Parents, are in, around and thru all things. They are one with everything. They are one with, and are the Archetypal expression of, the totality of oneness, sometimes called the Tao, the Pleromah, the Ain Soph, the Clear Light and other such terms. They have personality because They go into, and out of, such oneness at will. They enter it to conceive universes and entities to populate them, They then withdraw to a degree so that They might be known by those creations They have created. The Ultimate Father is called Depth, and the Ultimate Mother is called Silence, because of Their association with such oneness. Yeshu (Jesus) and Maria (Mary Magdalene), called the Christos and the Hagios Pneuma in some Gnostic writings such as Ptolemy, make up the two additional "Aeons" of the 30 mentioned by Valentinius. Yeshu-Maria are those who know the First Parents most intimately, and therefore can communicate Their essence to the rest of us. They therefore stand next to them in closeness to the Ain Soph Unified Light. These doctrines are spoken of in our Ptolemy scripture from the Scriptorium page of the Yesu-Mari Abbey site.

We use the 32 Aeon titles to refer to these "Individuals" in the Atziluthian world. In the higher world of "Adam Qadmon" They merge into indistinct unity and oneness. In the lower Briatic and Yetzric world Their Archetypal essence manifests thru other semi-divine beings. We often use Egyptian Neter Archetypes for Briatic expressions of Their ultimate nature, and Hebrew Archangels as Their expression in Yetziric worlds. In this world of Assiah, we try ourselves to express one or another of these 32 "energies" or "forms of spirit" by choosing one fo the 32 Qabbalistic Paths to concentrate our energies upon.

21.2. As elaborated upon in the Clementine Homilies, the Greek pantheon entities have so much "personality" because they are based on human characters and weaknesses. We view these as aberant forms of the various 32 energies flowing downward from the 32 Aeons above.

21.3. The beginning parts of the Gospel of John actually contain reference to these 30 Aeons, as outlined in early Gnostic writings. We see Yeshu as all things, including the "Logos" principle of early Greek philosophy. Although Yeshu-Maria created all things, They did so indirectly thru the Demiurge and others.

21.4. We understand the "Logos" to be the mystery of 888 extended outward from the Depth, or Ultimate Source, like rays of light from the central sun.

21.5. Arik Anpin, or Aatic Yomin the Ancient of Days, is a higher Deity than Zaur Anpin, the Stern faced one, or Demiurge who is Jehovah (also called the little IAO). It is not impropper (sic) to call the Ancient of Days IAO [25], but the Deity of the Old Testament is considered by us to be the Demiurge (the manager).

21.6. The higher Aeons, Yeshu-Maria, descended down and became incarnate in flesh.

21.7. Christ takes away sin only by revealling the ultimate light, which when embraced, allows us to rise above all inferior vibrations.

21.8. Yeshu is the Lamb of the age of Aries (fulfilling prophecy uttered during this time frame), the Fish (IX0YS) of the age of Pisces, and is now the Waterman of the Aquarian age.

21.9. Spiritual rebirth - reforming of interior souls sheaths thru Ritual, with corresponding changes in consciousness and ability to manifest virtues.

21.10. The Kingdom of God, meaning "Rule" or theocracy of Aumen, is, as Yeshu states, here already for those with eyes to see. It is the state of harmony and communion with heaven which manifest physically as the Beni-Amin monastic level of life. By being renewed in deeper states of spiritual awareness, we are able to perceive the value of this "monastic" level of living and embrace it as our own.

21.11. Jehovah (Sabbaoth) once thought He was the ultimate God. At the coming of Yeshu and Maria He realized He was inferior even to a human being (Yeshu-Maria). The faithful centurion is His conversion symbol in the Gospels.

21.12. We usually understand Lord to be YHVH and God to be Elohim in most, but not all, the Bible translations also. Where we differ with Trimm and others is that we believe the Old Testament a fabrication of Ezra, and much of the New of Rome, per Islamic records and Epiphanius' account of the attitude of Nasarenes to the Pharasee torah. Although we feel much of the New is corrupt or interpolated, we do not have much of a problem with Revelations. Jehovah is considered a God, even the God to those under lesser Law, and so we do not have a problem with Sabbath being refered to as God, even tho Yeshu said He was the Lord of Sabbaoth. There is ultimately only one god, as Paul states. Other gods and demi-gods being but diverse manifestations of the One. These are deep doctrines covered in the Ancient of Days parts of the Zohar, not easily conveyed in a few sentences. The Letter to Flora, on the Scriptorium page under Ptolemy, sums up our position reasonably well.

21.13. We mourn the loss of the original Matthew which was used by the "Jewish-Christians", even as late as Jerome. Epiphanius claimed they, the Jewish-christians (possibly Nasarene remnants) had changed Matthew, but the truth is obviously the opposite - that the Roman Church had altered Matthew when it (sic) rewrote it from memory. (see islamic notes).

21.14. The texts of the "Nasarene Bible" were collected during the early days of Sons Aumen Israel, with the understanding that they represented only one of four groupings of texts, or bibles. The criterea for their collection was that each represented at least some of the energies and associated truths behind one of the 22 Qabbalistic paths on the Tree of life, hence their crystalized number of 22 books.

21.15. The Gospel of the Holy 12 is the main, Aleph, text of the Bible of the Assiah world (Essene Bible). The Nasarene texts are Yetzirah texts for those gathered into spiritual communities. They were collected from different sources and spiritual traditions, with slight rewordings to crete a uniformity of style and title for Deity.

21.16. The children, and teenagers under 16, have as their main text the Essene Gospel (of the holy 12). The Essene Church who we are associated with and who we see as the more active fulfilling of this "Essene" level, use other texts as well, but they are still in the process of determining their canon. The one thing we are all agreed upon is that the Lord wants the Essene Gospel to be the main Laeph text of this level of light. The Nasarene canon was crystalized many years ago and will no doubt remain unchanged. (The New Testament canon, by the way, was not finally determined till many centuries after Christ. Early writers and different locales all had different canons for centuries.)

21.17. The Way used by the early Nasarenes was slightly altered by Paul. So whether he spoke of the True Way or the gentile version of the way, is hard to determine. We use the term to denote the "Derek" of the Masshiach Yeshu-Maria.

21.18. O.M. [Oracles of Mohonri] exists in two versions, both essentially the same. The version on our web site has "aumounite" terminology which is mostly the changing of the English terms for Deity - Lord and God, for ones we consider more correct, such as Aumen or IAO. The content is the same, only it has been further translated to reflect our unique "jargon".

21.19. The other Bibles are also collections from different traditions. They are not fully crystalized at this point.

21.20. In reference to original Matthew, there is an early comment that the "sayings" (logon?) of Matthew, in other words not the stories of present Matthew, were translated by all the best they could. Some scholars therefore believe that the earliest Matthew was more after the Thomas format than the later story format. We feel this is likely in asmuch as many of its stories are obvious takes off Elijah and other Old Testament legends. The Islamic info newly come to light seems to verify this possibility. In light of this, and because of the obvious refreshing and illuminating nature of the Thomas text, we feel it a likely canidate for one of the earliest forms of wisdom sayings of Yeshu-Maria. It does not betray the extensive tampering that the "Q Gospel" research indicates. We wholey approve of its emphasis on gnosis verses blind belief in vicarious atonement, which was a Roman doctrine that crept into early churches thru the influence of Paul and others.

21.21. We also have canonized the Pearl Hymn found in the Acts of Thomas, but not the whole Thomas Acts story of India travel. We feel it likely that he actually went there but have no strong position on it. We also have canonized the Life of St. Issa which accounts Yeshu going to India and Tibet. This text is our rational for employing so many Tibetan and eastern concepts into our Path. It is our position that such was also accomplished during the days of the Messiah, but that these concepts were weeded out by the Roman culture when it condemned all things Nasarene.

21.22. The Gospel of Thomas is not considered more valuable by us, just a more likely historical candidate for one of the most original recordings of Yeshu-Maria's sayings. More true in the sense of being more "historical", which, by the way, is not our yardstick for valuable.

21.23. We are relativily happy with John, feeling that the tampering has been slight in comparrison with the other synoptic texts - hence its inclusion in our canon with only slight slight terminology / gender changes. We do not consider it a perfect text.

21.24. All ideas of a physical resurrection of corpse like parts, of a physical return of a tangiable photographical being, of God destroying the wicked in one fatal swoop are categorically rejected by us as having no foundation in early Nasarene theology or world view. These are Roman and Qumran-like ideas that were grafted onto the pure Nasarene Way and have caused nothing but distraction to true seekers ever since their introduction.

21.25. We believe Christ was born of Joseph and Mary, under the overshadowing of the Shekinah. That he was born to immaculately pure and holy parents in a natural fashion, but that coupled with this purely natural birth were certain supernatural overshadowings. This was the original teaching which still exists in a scattered condition in the Roman Bible. These late changes, introduced to make Christ more like Zeus' son, were completed so late that some early versions of the bible still contain the original wording.

21.26. We believe Yeshu was crucified and definitely died shortly thereafter, that his most outer physical form, his Guph body, was not resurrected or resuscitated , but that He was resurrected. He being His inner most self along with many of His more outward sheaths, but not his most outer sheath.

21.27. Our contention is that the true Nasarene Way of Yeshu-Maria quickly gave way to another gospel, the main pivotal point being 135 AD when the Bishops of the Circumcision were ousted from Jerusalem. Because of the historical situation, expressed by the following quote, we do not beleive the texts reliable.

21.28. We also agree with the following quote:

21.29. Our web page http://www.geocities.com/Athens/3607/gop31nt.htm is our most complete argument on this subject. As for the "minority texts" you mention, these would not be dismissed out of hand by us because of their relative scarcity, nor would we be too quick to assume they were throwaways of no value. Our position is that alterations were made so early on that even the most early texts are not wholely reliable. The idea being that as soon as the Way was taken out of rural Nasarene encampments and cloistered enclaves like the Essene Quarter, it immediately began to be watered down or altered to urban and worldly viewpoints:

1 QILPOTH Carnivore Fed Flesh: Aaronic Priesthood (Oblates are raised as vegans.) Weighable, tangiable, photographical physical form.
2 GUPH Lacto-Vegetarian Flesh: Melchisedec Priesthood (Oblates are raised as vegans.) Weighable, tangiable, photographical physical form.
3 KHAT Vegan Flesh: Jaradite / Essene Order Weighable, tangiable, photographical physical form.
4 KHAIBIT Lower Nepheshian Sheath: Mohonrite / Nazarene Order
5 SAHU Middle Nepheshian Sheath: Zadokian / Ebionite Order
6 KA Upper Nepheshian Sheath: Enochian Order
7 BA Ruachian Sheath: Berashithian Order
8 AKH Neshamah Sheath: Mazzalothian Order
9 SEKHEM Yechida Sheath: Yohonian Order
10 HAMMEMIT Chia Core: Messianic Orders

21.30. We acknowledge the existence of Shadim (pretan entities) as a psychological interference in the reception of truth, but not as any real barrior [35] . We believe that one who seeks will find, that as we sincerily knock the answer will come. Not all at once, but it will trickle in and as we take heart to incorporate new truth into our lives, more is given. Line upon line. The actual keys are given by Peter in the Clementine Homilies. There he says that any scripture, or part of scripture, that contradicts the ultimate compassion of altruistic nature of Deity is an interpolation of men and to be rejected.

I would not want to advocate someone walking a certain "Path" because of scholarly evidence. I believe that there is enough evidence to date to make one suspicious of the purity of the received and orthodox christian tradition, but the historical evidence is yet slim, or poorly understood, that makes any alternative stand our clearly. Events of the early years are still understood differently by different students of these times, and almost every book on the subject has a new theory it seems. So trusting on the word of scholars who cannot even agree among themselves seems shaky to say the least, but then so does relying on the standard party line developed by early opponents to the "Jewish-Christians" who were the only ones with a real oral and written link to Yeshu and Maria.

21.31. We are left, in the end, with our own conclusions, hopefully drawn from reasonable research and prayerful annalysis, and hopefully inspired by a loving Heavenly Parent who desires to lead us up the best road possible. The external evidence is not strong enough to be all convincing at this point in time, perhaps in a few years when work such as the Q endeavor comes to greater fruition, or when another large find like Qumran or Nag Hamaddhi (sic) produce more original texts. If one feels the Lord, after due study and prayer, has given them a testimony of a certain scripture, or Path, then that is what one must ultimately rely on.

21.32. Our understanding of the trintity is Qabbalistic - that the 3 higher Sephiroth on the Tree of Life, the Supernal Ones, represent divinity in a variety of ways. In one facet, the highest Keter is the Undifferentiated Oneness we refered to earlier, called by us Aumen. The Second and Third Sephirah are Maria and Yeshu as masculine and feminine expressions of this unity in the outer, non-pleromatic, worlds. We use this Pythagorean model to describe the monad, duad and triune nature of Deity. Yet there are other allocations, one being that Abba and Amma Aumen are Keter, Yeshu and Maria are Binah (#2) and the Ruach HaQadesh, the enlightened, are as the third Sephirah.

21.33. Mary Magdalene was conceived naturally, and spiritually, as Yeshu was said to have been by all Aramaic followers in the first few centuries.

21.34. Six is one legitimate grouping of the Divine, in harmony with the Qabbalistic itnerpretation of the first verse in Genesis. So are the Duad (Mother and Father in Heaven), the Tetrad (Parents plus Yeshu-Maria - YHVH), the Hexad and the Ogdoad of the Gnostics (8 + 10 + 12) and the Decad of the Pythagoreans, Qabbalists and Gnostics (ogdoad pluse Christus and Pneuma). But all of these Pythagorean complexities are best resolved in Aumen being One, the Monad, the Unity of all things.

21.35. Six is actually the only perfect single digit, as 28 is of double digits and 496 of the triple digits.

We believe in a multiplicity of lives. Many spent in the celibate state so as to fine tune our virtue over the vice of lust. This is not an ultimate state, however, for it does not create. Whereas its temporary abating of creativeness has a good side, the pairing in the homosexual bond is considered most unfortunate by us. Plurality, inasmuch as it represents a certain unbalancing of forces (male and female), has its limits as well. Spiritually infused tantra between divine beings, such as Heavenly Father and one or more Wives, is another subject altogether.

21.36. Is the Mormon conception erroneous? For the most part, due to its faliure to take into account the fact that individuals, in different incarnations, may wed different mates. Original Mormonism taught woman could have many husbands as well as men. Brigham Young changed this to the Islamic pattern with all its limiting factors for the female. We do not advocate either system, but tolerate a form of both in individuals if they are sincere spiritual practicioners and have committed relationships that do not degenerate into open marriages which are to us no marriage at all.

21.37. Why do we allow it? Because it is not considered evil by us any more than having 3 kids is considered more evil than just 2. We do not agree that salvation lies in plural marriage, but rather in a pure and loving heart and a clear and wise mind. We do not practice sexual communism here.

21.38. As the Tibetans teach that everyone was once our mother, there is a certain possibility, due to reincarnation [45] , that many of the opposite sex involved in our spiritual path have been our spouses at some point. This does not matter, for we are not who we really are destined to be as of yet. As we become more mature in our spirituality, our marriages become more enduring. Eventually we become enabled to settle into an eternal union that cannot be ravaged by time or death. We are, in one sense, always married to whoever we were once married to in another life, making polygamy but a present manifestation of this fact. On the other hand, however, we have become new people and should seek for that mate, or mates, who perfectly compliment who and what we have now become.

21.39. The Oregon group is concentrated on teaching and sharing the Essene Message, whereas we are concentrated on the Nasarene message (i.e. kibbutz / moshav cooperative settlements). We are smaller because our way is harder and requires greater dedication. There are dedicated souls there as well, but they are the few rather than the many. Souls from here hold offices in the Church headquartered there. Souls there filter and send qualified candidates here for deeper training.

Nazariah is the head of the Essene Church, Isis and Davied Israel are the heads of Sons Aumen Israel, and Abba Nazariah, Amma Nazarina, Amma Isis and Abba Davied are the equal heads of the Nasarene Order beginning to be built up here (the Order of Yahshua-Maria). Alesha, Mem and Hava are all former members of Sons Aumen Israel. None of them are current leaders or other names for Isis.

21.40. No association with Azrael. The Independent Church was a slanderous breakoff from Sons Aumen Israel, once claiming preisthood (sic) from us and using the Oracles. They have since disclaimed such associations, at least publically, but still promote negativity about us and are the source of much misinformation. We wish them well.

21.41. Joseph Smith set up a second secret Church, which dwindled away after his death. Sons Aumen Israel claims to be a restoration of that defunct organization, initially inspired by visits from an angelic Joseph who brought spiritual plates which were transcribed and became the Oracles Text used by us.

21.42. Trimm, I thought, was based in Texas. Similarities are only surface. They are a Pauline-Pharisee mix from our view, whereas we reject both traditions.

21.43. A level is a tradition or school with a certain amount of truth, but not all truth. Similar to secular educational levels. One enters this life with a propensity to accept a certain level of truth, a certain religion. If one is faithful, in either this life or the next one may embrace a deeper layer.

21.44. Paul was inspired. The porch of the Temple needed to be built, and he did it well.

21.45. Gentile converts lived an easier level of the Nasarene Way while under their influence. It was the far off non-Aramaic congregations that eventually altered the customs and traditions, and eventually the scriptures, of the original groups of faithful gentiles and Nasarenes. This occured because of the language barrior more than the distance barrior, and because of the pact with the Roman authorities outlined in Islamic fragments.

21.46. Paul was correct in his asserion of equality of people, but the equality of cultures is a different story.

21.47. Whether Paul, or another interpolating in his name, apparently wanted no competition to his version of the truth. Paul speaks of milk and "meat" levels of the gospel, however, as did Clement and others.

21.48. Isis, to us, is but an earlier shadow of Maria of Magdalah - certainly not a witch. The complexity of the Egyptian system sytem does not lend itself to an easy borrowing from Babylon and Nimrod, so I do not trust these assertions.

21.49. Very vague and general ideas of the new age, those borrowed from deeper religions, have some truth to us but are nothing but nonsense when taken out of their monastic context. None of them, nor any specific writing, stick out in my mind. I have not heard of any specific new age group practicing traditional spiritual disciplines, but if there are some, I would propbably class them as eccletic mixes of older paths. When I think of new age, I generally think of bookreaders convinced that they have already arrived or those who await salvation in a ufo.

21.50. Serious sacrificing - several hours or more a day doing spiritual practices such as prayer, meditation, study, etc. Denying material ambitions and comforts for spiritual veracities.

21.51. We are unaware of any groups of close affinity to us. The Norway group was, as far as we know, but one man who put up the web sites against us and who tried to start the Independent ....church. His wife left him to join the community here, and it created bad feeling with him. He only visited here once or twice briefly, and we really did not know him very well.

21.52. Everyone will not ultimatly be exalted, but will eventually gravitate to their true heaven or hell after multitudes of lives. From our vantage point of this incarnation, the process seems infinite - yet it has a termination date that "only the Father knows".

21.53. Shaitan [Satan], and all Shadim [demons], evolved to their present state by choices they made. They can still choose the light if they wish.

21.54. Hebrews authored most likely by Barnabas. We call it the Book of Barnabas. Yeshu made a general atonement for sin, but not a specific one for either himself or others. We do not look at Jehova as an angel as much as a lesser God representing the Highest God to all who have no vision to see higher than Him.

21.55. Although Christ takes a somewhat passive role in the affairs of this universe, allowing it to take the course its inhabitants have designed for it, They are in ultimate control of its affairs. Man neither frustrating Their plans, nor delaying them. Because we believe in reincarnation, we cannot accept your conclusion that only a thousand or so have been saved if our understandings are correct. The Aquarian Gospel is not honored by us. The Ouseley passage of 49 years is understood by us as 49 phases. We believe that Yeshu died in 28 AD. probably on April 23, not at age 49. As to your other numerous questions, I feel they have been answered, for the most part, by the above. Since we look upon the New Testament canon as suspect, a word by word annalysis (sic) of its various books would seem to be of questionable profit.

21.56. Abba and Ammas spiritually counsel, encourage, gently teach the sincere, administer ordinance work, give blessings and represent heavenly forces and presences.

In my third and final chapter on 'Sons Ahmen/Aumen Israel' I shall be looking at the spiritual ancestry of both SAI and Mormonism The reader may well be wondering why I am spending such an inordinate amount of time and effort on a group numbering probably less than a dozen souls. Whilst it is true that my association with SAI caused much persobal trauma and heartache, this was a long time ago and most of the wounds have since healed. I do, however, have another more important reason, which I have hinted at in this essay, namely my assertion that the evolution of SAI casts a light back into the very hub or Mormonism itself, from which it came, and where upwards of 12 million souls today find their spiritual home. To understand Gilbert Clark and SAI is to better understand Joseph Smith and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints that he founded.

Footnotes

[8] In fact, Clark believes in a multi-tiered system that includes the Church of the Unborn, the Church of the Firstborn, the Church of Enoch, the Church of Christ, etc.. He was, however, constantly tinkering around with ideas so that no one single model survived for very long. He even “squeezed” the former Independent Church into his system. Return

[9] Lance S. Owens, “Joseph Smith and Kabbalah: The Occult Connection” in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought (Vol.27, No.3, Fall 1994, pp.117-194). This article may be viewed on the Internet at http://www.gnosis.org/jskabb1.htm Return

[10] Lance S. Owens, “Joseph Smith: America’s Hermetic Prophet” (Gnosis: A Journal of Western Inner Tradition, Spring 1995). This article may be viewed on the Internet at http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/ahp.htm Return

[11] Christopher C. Warren, “Polyandry or ‘Matriarchal’ Marriage: An Historical and Theological Analysis of the Doctrine of a Woman Being Married to More Than One Man in Latter Day Saint and World Tradition”, Restoration: The Journal of Latter Day Saint History, Vol.7, No.3, July 1988, pp.11-21. This was written at a time when the author still regarded himself as part of the Restoration Movement - not all the views expressed in the penultimate section, “The Position of the Independent Church”, pp.20-21, are held by the author today. Return

[12] The only known time Joseph Smith discussed the doctrine of evolution, called at that time “the transmigration of souls”, was in a conversation with “Joshua the Jewish Minister” who claimed to be the reincarnation of Matthias the apostle. Smith’s reply, “I told him that his doctrine was of the devil, that he was in reality in possession of a wiced and depraved spirit” may be interpreted to mean that Smith rejected reincarnation. A closer examination of the whole incident may, however, indicate that Smith was referring to the man’s whole doctrinal scheme which included the claim that he was “the Spirit of Truth” and that he “possessed the soul of Christ” (Doctrinal History of the Church, November 9, 1835, Vol.2, pp.304-307 and Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Deseret, Salt Lake City, 1977, pp.103-105). This ambiguity may explain in part why an LDS schismatic group, ‘The True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days’ based in Manti, Utah, believes and teaches a doctrine of reincarnation - for details, see, Christopher C. Warren, “Correspondences with the True and Living Church on the Topic of Reincarnation, Restoration: The Journal of Latter Day Saint History, Vol.10 1998, pp.24-27. Return

[13] Key to the numbering system: 1.2.b = First letter - second question - subquestion in a second letter. Return

[14] A curious rendition. The original Hebrew for Jesus is pretty well agreed on by everyone as being either ‘Yah’shua’ or ‘Yeshua’ (though a very small minority claims ‘Yehoshua’). Clark’s dropping of the final vowel may, however, have something to do with his gematric beliefs about sacred numbers, ‘Yahshu’ (under SAI’s private ‘Aumounite’ system) yielding 330 as compared to Yah’shua (334) and Yeshua (338), or he may simply be confused with the Greek form, ‘Yesu’ which he also uses. Return

[15] A clear example of occultic Pantheism. In the Christian tradition Yahweh-God is both everywhere in His creation as well as being entirely separate from it. Return

[16] The “Oracles of Mohonri” or “Sealed Portion of the Book of Mormon”, claimed by Clark to be that part of the Book of Mormon Joseph Smith was forbidden to open and translate. An extract of the rewritten third edition may be found in The Journal of Latter Day Saint History, Vol.12 2000, pp.23-27, and the whole book at the SAI website at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5774/om1.htm. The Second unchanged edition may still be downloaded at the site of ‘Absalom’ at ftp://ftp.absalom.com/pub/absalom in the zip file mohonri.zip. Return

[17] “If you know the O[racles of] M[ohonri] are true, then you are called, by virtue of that belief, to gather to Zomer Zion [SAI] and there prepare for His [Christ’s] Second Coming” (Letter from Gilbert Clark to the author, undated, received 9 May 1986, p.10). Either Clark’s belief has changed about the Second Coming or he lied in order to appeal to my strong belief in it. I tend to the latter view because Clark always pandered to people’s beliefs, giving the impression he believed the same way to then reveal a completely different belief later, a practice he has subsequently justified. Return

[18] Though he does not explain it very clearly, Clark does not mean that Smith brought the Oracles during his life time but as an allegedly resurrected persage Return

[19] Clark is not telling the truth here for he was heavily involved in that organisation, albeit for only a year, and caused a schism. See Part 1 of this article for that story. Return

[20] In fact, most of SAI’s core beliefs are directly derived from those of John W. Bryant, including the key doctrine that the Holy Spirit is only transmitted in fluids and principally through sexual intercourse. Return

[21] Jean Poulson, aka ‘Hava Pratt’, with whom I had lengthy corrspondences, was the co-founder of SAI with Clark and a passionate supporter of his work. Her reasons for abandoning the movement, along presumably with her second husband Robert Cummins and his first wife, are not presently known, but may possibly have something to do with Clark’s abandonment of classical Mormonism (which she was passionately committed to) and his overt occultic beliefs. She and Clark first met in John Bryant’s ‘Evangelical Church of Christ’ and formed a schismatic group. Poulsen abandoned her Mormon husband and ten children to join the SAI cult. Return

[22] Clark believes that his particular form of salvation is not through Yah’shua/Jesus alone but through both Yah’shua and Mary Magdalene, the latter of whom is a co-redemptrix. The Roman Catholic Church is even at this time pressing for the Virgin Mary to receive a similar status to Christ as co-Saviour. Mother Teresa of Calcutta was a strong supporter of this movement. Return

[23] One of the reasons scholars have problems accepting Pauline authorship of, for example, Hebrews, is the more polished Greek style inspite of the the fact that nearly all of the Church Fathers (especially those in the eastern part of the Empire) recognised Paul as the writer and the fact that the text contains numerous Paulisms (e.g. Heb.13:22-25). Return

[24] ‘Mem-Maria Israel’, whose family Clark is known to have broken up, former leader of SAI, now believed to have to have left the community, wrote in to David Bowie’s Latter Day Saint Movement Religion Page (see http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dbowie/restore/sunsai.html) on 1 January 1996 and listed Aleister Crowley’s, Book of Law as one of SAI’s scriptures. She also lists occultist Frazier’s The Golden Dawn as one of the texts they study: “We also study Tibetan and Zen Buddhist text [sic], the Golden Dawn writers, Jungian psychology, astrology, numerology, ancient alphabets, alchemy, herbology, and the healing arts”. Return

[25] IOU is the Greek for Yah, the abbreviated Name of God, Yahweh. Interestingly enough, the first edition of the Oracles of Mohonri, now rewritten, which is regarded as the esoteric text of SAI, claims to have been written by YAHWEH, the stern-faced “Demiurge” angel Clark believes is inferior to Christ (e.g. OM 1 Mohonri 1:1-2, 1st edition) who is acknowledged as being the Creator of the whole Universe (see whole of Chapter 1). It is this “Yahweh-Elohim” who is the revealer of all of SAI’s “secrets” (2 Mohonri 1:1), “secrets withheld even from my angels...” (v.2). This immediately contradicts current SAI theology who maintain that an inferior angel-deity, “Yahweh”, inspired the Old Testament (at other times that Ezra changed the original), that the next deity up in the heirarchy, Yah’shua/Jesus inspired the (supposedly unmutilated parts of the) New Testament, and that the supreme SAI deity, Aumen (Ahman) inspired the SAI scriptures! Clark, seeing an obvious error in his key scriptural work, was thus obliged to “change the terminology” in his lastest edition which appears on his website (see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5774). The “new” version reads: “We Are IAO Elohim, And Inasmuch As Ye Inquire Into Our Mystery, We Disclose To You Our Secrets” (OM 7, Eastertide Shawua Eve 15 Of 49; Shaur Lunar Evening 8 (First Quarter Moon); (Lectio For Havdalah High Mass)). The original text reads: “I am Yahweh-Elohim, and inasmuch as you inquire into my mystery, I disclose to you my secrets” (2 Mohonri 1:1). How come the singular Demiurge has suddenly become the plural IAO? Who is talking in this book? This may be seen as a typical example of shifting SAI doctrine with Clark resorting to changing his own scriptures. Either it was the SAI Demiurge that spoke or it was the SAI gods. He can’t have it both ways. Return

[26] “We must be resurrected before we die” (Gilbert Clark, letter to the author, October 15, 1987, p.10). Return

[27] There are so many scriptures in the New Testament that establish that salvation is by faith alone, with works the fruit of one thus saved, that it would be inappropriate to list them all here. A careful study of Paul’s epistle to the Romans will reveal what the Christian doctrine of salvation actually is. Conveniently, Clark dismisses the writings of Paul as a perversion of the ‘original Nazarene Gospel’. Return

[28] In the SAI system “atonement” is acquired by the worshipper in a seven-fold process involving ritual, meditation, etc., by which one receives more and more atoning ‘light’ (Gilbert Clark, undated letter to the author, ca. 1987, p.2). Moreoever, Clark claims that “the real pain of Christ’s crucifixion was not physical, but the heartbreak caused by his intense love of Mary [Magdalene]...” (Undated letter to the author, postmarked August 27, 1988, p.2). Return

[29] Joseph Smith made the same mistake, using “Jehovah” as the Name of God in the last verse of the Book of Mormon (Moroni 10:34), in fact a quote of mistranslated Acts 10:42 (King James Version). Return

[30] First edition of OM: “I am called Joseph [Smith] the fruitful bow...” (1 Moroni 2:4), cp. “Joseph [the son of Jacob] is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches run over the wall” (Gen.49:22, AV). When writing this passage Clark evidently had the Book of Mormon story of Nephi’s bow in mind (1 Nephi LDS 16:18ff, RLDS 5:20ff) and the prophecies about Joseph Smith himself (2 Nephi LDS 3, RLDS 2), mixing the three together.Though Clark tried to dismiss this as a simple spelling error when I first confronted him with it, there is clearly an association of mixed ideas taking place, and evidence that the OM is a collection of conceptual revelations from a dubious spiritual source. And yet Clark claims: “I know O.M. [Oracles of Mohonri] to be 100% pure because of the intensity of the experience, and because of how my mind was so totally shut down...” (Undated letter to the author, received May 9, 1986, p.4). Joseph Smith said much the same about his Book of Mormon though 150 years of research has shwon it to be riddled with errors. Return

[31] It was I who first introduced Clark to this book. His reaction was: “I enjoyed and agreed with much of it, but also disagreed in places” (Letter to the author, January 10, 1987, p.3). Return

[32] OCC (Old Covenants & Commandments of the Independent Church), Section 47. Return

[33] “Some of the contradictory statements made by the early B[oo]k of M[ormon] witnesses, such as they ‘saw the plates with their spiritual rather than their physical eyes’, I am not closed to the possibility that Joseph [Smith] had an experience similar to my own in that the later version of hefting plates, etc., was embellished to appeal to the more ‘practical’ viewpoints of those he was dealing with at the time. Perhaps the Lord allowed stage props to help the weak faith of those not able to appreciate a purely spiritual experience...” (Letter from Gilbert Clark to the author, undated, received 9 May 1986, p.3). Return

[34] See Christopher C. Warren, “A Letter to the Editor”, The Journal of Latter Day Saint History, Vol.9 1997, pp.61-62, on the appropriateness of using myths to build religious faith whilst claiming the myths to be historical. Return

[35] One is reminded a little here of Ron Hubbard’s Scientologist idea that humans are inhabited by “Thetans” and that man’s goal is to become a “clear”. Return

[36] In another variation of endless ‘Second Coming’ doctrines Clark claimed that once SAI was purified that Christ would come and physically live in the colony with them (Letter to the author, January 31, 1988, p.1). Return

[37] “If one does away with Matriarchal Marriage [polyandry - one woman married to several men], & by this I mean marriage to a Patriarch who has at least two other spouses, then one will rob a Holy Order [SAI] of its balance of light & it would cease to be. Homosexuality could not be cured either...As the genitals of the man are the organ to transmit Ra-shin light [“male Holy Spirit”] to a female, as the breasts are the female counterpart which transmits Ra-mem light [“female Holy Spirit”]. They both protrude from the body in order to fulfil this function...The ordinance to cure homosexuality is [first] by firstborn baptism. The water is consecrated thru union [sexual intercourse] therein, which can be done...by the Patriarch and Matriarch...Just as in actual childhood, the homosexual adult child must absorb both masculine & feminine energy thru breast feeding on its mother...[and]...by sleeping in the aura of a Matriarch...Only thru actual sucking [a breast if a man, a penis if a lesbian] can enough [healing energy] be absorbed...such healing can not take place without [sexually] endowed women becoming true Matriarchs [by being married polyandrously in the SAI system]” (Gilbert Clark, letter to the author, February 9, 1988). The mechanism by which homosexuals and lesbians are supposedly to be cure is explained in great detail in a revelation received by Clark called the “Isaac-Sarah Revelation” received on August 30, 1987. I critiqued this document round about the same time it was received in an article entitled, “Why I Reject the ‘Isaac-Sarah’ Revelation: Some Preliminary Observations and Comments”, my main argument being that it either severely neglected the atonement in the healing process or rejected it altogether. Return

[38] “There is a certain level of Light or Priesthood that can only be transferred thru [sexual] union in Messianic Marriage...There must be a true, sexually-sealed marriage to Christ, to become a literal member of His family [SAI]....[The holy] Spirit passes with the seed & fluids of the body...” (Gilbert Clark, letter to the author, ibid.) Return

[39] “...I lived with members of Sons Ahman Israel...in a trailer in a corner of the estate and took part in the life of the community while I was there. I had originally intended to stay longer, but left after 2 months...The purpose of my visit was to find out more about what the group stood for. I had studied their theology beforehand and exchanged letters with a couple of the members....as time passed, I discovered that there were two major points which meant that I could not accept the community...The first of these was that the spiritual aspect of the community seemed to be subordinated to the physical (actually sexual) ordinances. In other words, the elements of worship and ceremony at the core were based on sexual or sexually related acts. Spiritual and mental healing were supposed to take place through sexual relationships between the people there. The sexual aspect seemed to pervade everything and was given an exaggerated prominence. It was supposed to provide a means through which conflicts of all deep problems, i.e. emotional, mental, and spiritual in general could be resolved. Alcohol also played a central part in the ceremony of the ordinances, the belief apparently being that under the influence of wine the soul would be open to positive spiritual influences from the outside. I can give some examples of this as follows:- (a) Davi[e]d Israel [Gilbert Clark], the founder and male leader of the community claims that he was ordained a patriarch (i.e. the hightest priesthood on earth) by Mary Magdalene. This “ordination” supposedly took place through sexual intercourse between him and Mary Magdalene; (b) A basic idea and the main goal for SAI is to found a polyandrous (many men and many women being married to each other) marriage consisting of 15 patriarchs and 15 matriarchs. The community believes that only by this number of patriarchs and matriarchs can sufficient divine power be generated for the community to receive Christ. Only then can peace be established on the earth and Christ take over the government of the world; (c) Davi[e]d Israel does not exclude the possibility of sisters and brothers being married to each other if required by the circumstances; (d) The supreme female leader of the community and one of its founders, Hava Pratt [Jean Poulsen], claims to have been “married” to the late Mormon prophet Joseph Smith (who lived from 1805 to 1844). She maintains that Joseph Smith is her patriarchal husband and therefore her contemporary husband is more of a concubine on a lower level; (e) Hava Pratt told me on one occasion that all love is erotic love and that if a child, for example, looks up to his or her teacher, this implies the pupil is sexually attracted to the teacher; (f) A man named Aaron Stills claims that he has taken part in a homosexual relationship consisting of many “holy men”, Christ being one of those. This same Aaron Stills who did not live at the premises of SAI, but is closely associated, claims to have had an intimate physical relationship (although not sex) with Davi[e]d Israel on at least one occasion...Davi[e]d Israel is, according to the group’s own rites, married to a woman called Faith, another woman called Patty and also the Respondent. He was also interested in inviting other male friends to begin a relationship with his first wife Faith. While the group felt that this ought to occur, the exception was a man called Ted, who was strongly perturbed by the thought of my being invited to be the third husband to Faith. The woman called Patty was legally married (I believe) to a man called Delbert Cummins [aka Ammaron Israel] who was the only person at that time who had a regular job, and who was very bitter because he was not invited to be a member of the expanded polyandrous marriage...I understand that both Davi[e]d, Ted and Faith shared a bed together from time to time. I mention all these details by way of showing the degree of confusion and tension which existed between the members, and I decided there was definitely no place in the community for me” (Extract from an Affidavit sworn by ED, a former member of SAI, on 27 June 1990 in Oslo, Norway, pp.4-7). Return

[40] “My head & heart are filled with visions of the firstborn family & their intimate unions with one another during and after the days of Christ” (Gilbert Clark, letter to the author, undated, received December 1987). Return

[41] op.cit., Christopher C. Warren, “Polyandry or ‘Matriarchal’ Marriage: An Historical and Theological Analysis of the Doctrine of a Woman Being Married to More Than One Man in Latter Day Saint and World Tradition”, Restoration: The Journal of Latter Day Saint History, Vol.7, No.3, July 1988, pp.11-21. Return

[42] “If one has not had sexual relations with one’s spouse since Rosh Hashana, one technically is not married to them [any longer]” (Gilbert Clark, letter to the author, February 9, 1988). Return

[43] LDS D&C 132:51-56 Return

[44] Letter from “Faith Israel”, undated, ca. mid 1988. Return

[45] In 1987 Clark claimed that he does not actually “believe” in reincarnation (called by him gilgulim) “because I do not believe it is Christ’s way and plan because it is ruled by other powers but such will cease when dominion of it returns to Christ at Adam-ondi-Ahman...” (Undated letter to the author, postmarked September 1, 1987, p.5). At this time he taught that Christ would be returning to the earth, a doctrine he now rejects, along with the Mormon concept of Adam-ondi-Ahman. It is interesting that he believes that the souls of men are in the control of “other powers” who apparently have the know-how to reincarnate us contrary to Christ’s Plan. Return

[46] Gilbert Clark, letter to the author, July 28, 1987, p.4. Return

[47] SAI Archive of the New Covenant Church of God, #1988-SAI/MSS. This is probably the largest archive of SAI materials outside SAI itself as well as containing materials long since removed/destroyed by Clark in the evolution of his religious system. Return

[48] Christopher C. Warren in the Evening & Morning Star, No.20, May 1989, “Deception: The Antichrist is Here”, pp.1-14, Independent Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Oslo, Norway. Page 8 is a reproduction of one of these documents showing in Clark’s own handwriting (a) that Mary is our Heavenly Mother; and (b) that SAI is “New Age Mormonism/Essenism”. The font cover also shows part of the original SAI logo of a six-armed swastika, Buddhist lotus and Hindu OM/AUM sign in Sanskrit. Return

[49] ‘Revelation’ received by Clark on January 6, 1988. This ‘revelation’ caused Clark’s bona fide legal wife, faith, to go berserk because it appointed my wife as his co-head at SAI. Some angry letters were exchanged between Faith and my wife (and doubtless there were some ‘scenes’ between Ckark and Faith) resulting in Clark denying that this was the meaning of the revelation at all. He later wrote a letter to my wife showing his change of heart: “I now feel that you have been called to stand in Binah as a Matriarch, not as a Matriarch over any other Matriarchs, not as “queen matriarch”, but as one among equals” (Gilbert Clark, letter to my wife, dated February 10, 1988, p.5). And so the original ‘revelation’ went out the window and his wife Faith was placated. My own wife in her turn went berserk and had a temper tantrum. This was typical of the way Clark the seducer ‘solved’ blunders and abused ‘revelations’ to get his own way or to smooth over troubled waters. In the ‘revelation’, moreoever, I was appointed to be my wife’s polyandrous concubine. Worse, there was a homosexual and bisexual New Ager involved in the ceremony. The reader may well imagine how I felt about the whole business and conclude what he/she may about the whole spiritual tenor of SAI. He would never admit to any wrong. When I accused him of stealing my wife, he replied: “It is not I who have “stolen” your wife, but it is the Lord who has taken her unto Himself as a bride [through Clark, of course]” (Letter to the author, February 10, 1988, p.1). A ‘revelation’ addressed to me (dated January 20, 1988) was soon in the coming to calm me down as he realized that he had in me an adversary determined to right the wrong done to my family. The reason he confided so much in me in his numerous latters was because he feared that if I was not converted I would expose the whole SAI fraud. At one point I issued a fake ‘revelation’ on March 21, 1988 whilst visiting SAI which spoke of Clark and his colony in glowing terms to test the cultic leader’s prophetic gifts. Both he and Hava Pratt swallowed it hook, line and sinker, with Pratt even embracing me in tears and testifying that I was truly a “prophet of God”. Needless to say such demonstrations only convinced me further that I was dealing with a nefarious cult. They spared no pains to win me to their cause, even financing my visit when they were economically destitute. After I departed from my visit to SAI, I received a part-threatening, part-reconciling letter from Clark (May 4, 1988, Seguin, Texas). Return

[50] See http://www.geocities.com/Athens/3607/lds.htm which contains a reworked version of an article I wrote for the preface of the Second edition of OM. My requests to have the original article removed from the SAI site were ignored and the author was originally listed as being “dead”. Most of the material in this article is mine though no credit is given. I no longer believe in this material. Return

[51] Ex.32:4-8, 18-25, 35; Dt.19:16, 21; Neh.9:18; Ps.106:19-20; Ac.7:41; D.J.Wiseman, Illustrations from Biblical Archaeology, 1959, p.39, fig.33. Some believe it was the Mnevis bull of Heliopolis. There were several bull-cults in the eastern part of the Nile delta near where the Hebrews lived in Goshen. Return

[52] “The Crux Ansata, so frequently observed in the hands of the statues of the old kings and gods of Egypt, was evidently both solar and Phallic in signification, and represented a combination of the male and female principles in nature” (Robin C. Blackmer, The Lodge and the Craft: A Practical Explanation of the Work of Freemasonry, St.Louis, Missouri, 1923, p.249). Return

[53] “...we know that any government set up on the earth is set up by satan... (Delbert Cummins, aka ‘Ammaron Israel’ - whose legal wife Patti is a polyandrous concubine to Clark - in a letter to the author, dated February 6, 1988). Return

[54] “I found this desire for total isolation from the world very peculiar. The Respondent in her action has also taken an isolationist stance: she has broken all contacts with her friends...I feel that the community is isolated from the outside world in many ways: geographically, socially, morally and intellectually. I do not think this is a good environment for raising children, and I believe I have the ability to discern this as a professional teacher. I do not think my own view of SAI is restricted by my own theological views. I would describe myself as close to the mainstream of Protestantism, but I judge the environment of child raising from the perspective of the wider secular world. I do not think SAI is a healthy place for children to grow up in for the following reasons: (a) It displays a distorted and abnormal way of thinking and behaving; (b) It places considerable emphasis on like-mindedness; (c) The adult examples and social ideas are extreemly restricted and dubious; (d) There is no generally diverse stimulation for the children from being a part of the wide adult world, which will make it difficult for them to relate to other children and adults when they themselves become older; (e) The social intercourse and skills which they develop at SAI is, in my view, quite lacking in preparing them to cope with members of a greater society. I believe that when the time comes for the children to move out of the community, either for higher education, or finding work or friends, they will be totally unprepared and in consequence lobely and ostracised” (Extract from an Affidavit sworn by ED, a former member of SAI on 27 June 1990 in Oslo, Norway, pp.8-9). Return

[55] “As far as I am aware, [Davied Israel] has never had a regular job and is dependant upon his parents for financial support. There are many members of the community who get supplies of basic food stuffs from coupons distributed by the welfare department of the state. Without this state support there would have been a major lack of food in the community. Davi[e]d Israel thinks of himself as a visionary, but I would describe him rather as a man who has his head in the clouds. He lives in his own world of ideas without any real grasp of the realities of ordinary life. At first I was struck by his extreme calmness of mind, but after I came to know him a bit better during the time I was there, I saw that he really did not understand people and had a lack of discernment of people’s needs and problems. I was also very surprised that he was apparently disinterested in the expansion of the community. This did not seem to correspond to his claimed vision, and I wonder whether he was in fact more motivated in his desires for a comfortable lifestyle isolated in the wastes of the Arizona desert than in serving his fellow man” (Ibid., p.8). Return

[56] Is.44:6; 45:5, 21; 1 Cor.8:4; Dt.32:39 Return

[57] Mt.21:42; 22:29; 26:54; Jn.5:39; etc. Return

[58] A careful study of the Epistle to the Hebrews will clearly reveal the truth of these assertions. Return

[59] Clark’s interest in channelling is proved by the fact that when I was investigating SAI he sent me a photocopied article from Life Times: Forum for a New Age (No.3, pp.82,93-98) entitled, “Channeling” about which he made some positive comments in an accompanying letter (postmarked July 21, 1987). Return

Return to SAI Index Page

Previous Next

This page was created on 22 March 2000

Last updated on 22 March 2000

Copyright © 2000 The New Covenant Church of God

P.O.Box 120, S-671 23 ARVIKA, Sweden