Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00441)

I believe the following two paragraphs are entirely 
written by Morten:
-----------------------------------------------------

"I have the hope, that you will realise if you not already 
do so, that the Cleather and Crump views are allright as 
far as they goes. But they are limited - and as my answering 
email http://theos-talk.com/archives/200210/tt00046.html
sort of says - that view is frozen in time.
---
Today it is a misrable view, because it is so old, and do 
not deal with all of the Bailey books. More so we live in 
the year 2004, and things have indeed changed."
------------------------------------------------------------

I am still puzzled by what Morten has written above.

He apparently believes that the Cleather and Crump views
on Bailey "are limited"....that their views about the
Bailey book are "frozen in time".

But I fail to understand exactly WHY they are limited. In comparison
to what?? He fails to explain what he means by "frozen in time"
and fails in my opinion to convey what he is offering as an 
alternative.

Morten apparently goes on to say that the Cleather/Crump
views on Bailey are "miserable" because they are so OLD. 

Again I fail to understand what is Morten's reasoning behind
his characterizations of MISERABLE and OLD. Pray tell, what is
NEW in contrast to what he labels as OLD??

Again Morten writes:

"More so we live in the year 2004, and things have indeed 
changed." 

WHAT HAS CHANGED? And WHAT HAS CHANGED that would render
the Cleather/Crump critique invalid in 2004.

In 2004 one can just as easily compare Bailey's teachings
with Blavatsky's original presentation as was done decades
ago by Crump and Cleather.

I fail to understand what would be different today in 2004.
And Morten does not give us any insight into what he
is actually contending.

It seems to me that Cleather and Crump were simply comparing
the teachings of Bailey with those of Blavatsky and noting
that there were distinct DIFFERENCES. I see those same
DIFFERENCES in 2004.

Daniel