Theos-Talk Archives (June 2004 Message tt00232)

A year or two ago, Steve wrote:

=======================================================

. . . the only proof we can have of the masters'
historical existence is testimony from a qualified
witness, and we have that from Olcott. . . . Olcott's
testimony is sufficient in my judgment to establish
their corporeal existence as legal persons. . . .
I cannot agree with anyone that they were fictions,
fantasies, imagined beings, trance personalities,
or any such thing as that unless the Olcott evidence
can be satisfactorily disposed of. I raised that
question some time ago, and no one has ever addressed
it, so for that reason I remain stubbornly convinced
that the mahatmas were real men as they were claimed
to be.

====================================================

Today I again asked Steve:

Have you now changed your mind about Olcott's testimony on the 
Masters in light of your recent statement that you "have been 
compelled to change my mind on numerous things after reading the 
remarks of K. Paul Johnson...."

He has now answered my question as follows:

"No, that argument stoill [still] seems sound to me. I do wish there 
were more corroborating evidence though."

Steve, THANK YOU very much for clarifying your stance on the subject
of Olcott's testimony about the Masters. 

Now if we could only get Bart to answer the question whether
he believes HPB ALSO faked some of the appearances of the Masters
since he already has stated that he believes HPB probably faked some 
of the occult phenomena.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc
http://theosophy.info