Theos-Talk Archives (March 2009 Message tt00263)

Dear Daniel, Morten and Anand,

I stand corrected. Anand compared and conflated two issues that have to be addressed seperatley:

1) The issue of the relationship between the man Jesus and the Christ principle 

2) The historicity of Jesus (we all seem to agree on this point)

To this has to be added the following topics to round out the discussion:

3) Dating the life of Jesus as either from ca. 100-70 B.C. or the conventional ca. 0-33 A.D.

4) The seperation of historical from mythical elements in the claims made about Jesus

5) Possible discrepancy in HPB's writings about the dating of Jesus' life in IU and later writings.

6) comparisson of HPB and CWL on all the above.

Much to go over here, so I'll just start with the above enumeration.

Govert

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: danielhcaldwell 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 10:54 PM
  Subject: Theos-World To Govert: Re: Who was the real Jesus?


  Govert,

  As regards Anand's allegation that there is a "difference between
  Morton and Daniel," apparently Anand is hallucinating the difference.

  Everything Morten has said about Christ and Jesus that I have read I
  agree with. Now maybe there is a posting from Morten I have missed. 
  If so Anand should cite it. 

  From what I have read in Anand's postings on this
  subject, I'm not sure he even has a grasp of the subject. As far as
  I can tell Anand has simply conjured up this "difference." Who knows
  since he usually only offers vague statements with little if any
  details whatsoever.

  As to what HPB says about Jesus and Christ, my understanding is that
  she accepts the historical reality of Jesus. I have no idea why
  Anand or you think otherwise. As to Christ, what does she say about
  Christ? 

  Read what the Chohan says in the letter I've quoted. And I've
  already quoted several statements by HPB and KH which reinforce the
  basic idea found in the Chohan's letter.

  And consider the verse from the VOICE OF THE SILENCE.

  "Look within, thou art Buddha."

  Does this verse mean the physical Gautama man???

  To make it simple, couldn't one say also:

  Look within, thou are Krishna.

  Look within, thou art Osiris.

  Look within, thou art Christ.

  Look within, thou are the Universal Spirit.

  Look within, thou art PARA-ATMA.

  THAT thou art.

  See what Krishna says:

  "I am the self, seated in the heart of all beings. Also, I am the
  Beginning, the Middle and the End of all beings."

  Can the Cosmic Christ say the same?

  Daniel
  http://hpb.cc

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@...> wrote:
  >
  > I just read some of the paragraphs on Jesus in HPB's "Isis Unveiled" and did get the strong impression that she did consider him a historical person set in the time that most people think he existed. The only mythic element about Jesus are the later mythic additions to the historical person. There is a reference to the 100 BCE Jesus, but that is presented as the Jewish take on Jesus and not as the true take. And if you look up Jesus in the index of IU and read the small sub-headings Jesus seems to be presented as quite historical. Unless these passages are better explained as propping up her later claim, they have to be seen as either an early mistake, or HPB was not yet informed about the 'real' Jesus, or it reflected her own development in understanding the topic. In either case the contradiction doesn't seem to lie so much in the difference between Morton and Daniel as in HPB's work itself. 
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: Anand 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 4:39 PM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: Blavatsky on CARNALIZING the central figure of the New Testament
  > 
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" <danielhcaldwell@> wrote:
  > >
  > > H.P. Blavatsky wrote in December 1887:
  > > 
  > .
  > > . . . true Theosophists will never accept ...a Christ made
  > > Flesh. . . .[390]
  > > ------------------------------------------------------
  > > 
  > > Quoted from H.P. Blavatsky's COLLECTED WRITINGS, Volume VIII.
  > > caps added.
  > > 
  > > http://hpb.cc
  > --------------------------------------
  > Compare Daniel's above message with message of other follower of Blavatsky, Morten. He wrote in his message 49429 this and says historical Jesus existed. It shows how two followers of Blavatsky had contradictory ideas and it shows how Blavatsky's writing creates confusion. Below is Morten's message.
  > --------------------------------
  > 1. H. P. Blavatsky, in Isis Unviled, p. xii:
  > "To you," said Jesus to his elect disciples, "it is given to know the mysteries
  > of the Kingdom of God, but to them [ the polloi^ ] it is not given; . . .
  > therefore speak I to them in parables [or allegories]; because they seeing, see
  > not, and hearing, they hear not, neither do they understand." - Gospel
  > according to Matthew, xiii. 11, 13.
  > http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/isis_unveiled1.htm
  > 
  > There are several examples, where HPB clearly were alluding to the fact that
  > Jesus was a historical person. Try H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, 1877, vol. I,
  > p. xxxviii, 2, 34, 57, 130, 138 etc. etc. And try H. P. Blavatsky, (The
  > beginners book) The Key to Theosophy, 1889, p. 47, 49, 71, 72, 79, 81 etc etc..
  > ---------------------------------------
  > 
  > Best
  > Anand Gholap
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]