Theos-Talk Archives (May 2009 Message tt00026)

HPB opposed all "organized" religions that believed in a supernatural  
personal God-creator, not just Christianity.

Since Buddhism does not have such a God, why would she oppose it?

Also, if you continue to repeat your unfounded innuendoes (with  
leading questions) that "Blavatsky made so many mistakes", why don't  
you cite those alleged mistakes and prove why they might be wrong?

Also, when you accuse Daniel of incorrectness, why don't you quote  
what he said?  Or, are you afraid someone might get wise to your  
continued attacks on anyone who considers Blavatsky as the valid  
teacher of theosophy, along with claims that she made mistakes -- as  
nothing more than soapbox blustering to promote the pseudo  
theosophist, Leadbeater as the only true theosophist?

Is it any wonder then, that some true theosophist who publishes or  
monitors a theosophical web site, might block the writings of or  
references to such a false prophet -- who violates all the tenets of  
the original Theosophical Movement itself (such as, not turning  
theosophy into an organized religion or not accepting any human being  
as a divine messianic figure to worship, not to mention changing the  
original teaching of cosmogenesis, and its formulas in the Book of  
Dzyan, etc., etc.)?

LHM

On May 1, 2009, at 5/1/091:36 PM, Anand wrote:

> If Blavatsky was against Christianity, just because she did not  
> like, then she should oppose all religions because there are big  
> differences between some major ideas of all religions and Theosophy.
> That means Daniel's reasoning behind Blavatsky's attacks on  
> Christianity is not correct.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links