Theos-Talk Archives (July 1994 Message tl00047)

(excerpt from Paul Johnson's reply to Lewis L.)
> Materialistic?  How-- I don't see the connection.  What makes
> it seem to you that I am denying the reality of everything
> non-physical?  That is by no means a position I take,
> either privately or in my writings.

It is materialistic in that you are requiring material proof.
(In My Humble Opinion).  Of course, a scholarly work must
require that.

> What is improbable is that the characters I was talking about--
> HPB's adept acquaintances in Europe, Asia and America-- all
> knew one another.  (Something that she, by the way, never
> specifically asserted as far as I recall). .....

> If you are suggesting that people who had never met and who shared no
> common languages could nevertheless all know one another on the inner
> planes and be in conscious communication-- if there were evidence that
> any of them had claimed such a thing I'd be more inclined to take it
> seriously.

.... some stuff deleted ...

> As to why I think it's improbable-- there's a rule of evidence that
> states "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." I hope you
> will at least grant that an international telepathic network of people
> who showed no outward evidence of knowing one other and had no common
> language would be quite out of the ordinary; I will in return grant
> that it is not impossible.  (Only had I said "impossible" rather than
> "improbable" would you have a basis for the charge of materialism.)

There are many examples of the physical reality of this hierarchy
WITNESSED by people who lived around Meher Baba during his lifetime.
Also he did much work with the Indian Musts (spelling??) who brought
him information (via spiritual contacts) during the War (WW II) etc.
Most accounts were written by the eyewitnesses themselves,  and some
are still living (a few are in Myrtle Beach,  SC)

of course one can declare that extraordinary proof be required.
The Skeptical Inquirer's slogan I think it is??  A fine group
of Scientific atheists.

do subordinary claims require subordinary proof??
the world is clearly flat you know....  e.g.   :-)

(The Skeptical Inquirer is one of my pet peeves to dislike!
you struck a nerve on that one !!  :-)

peace --

John E. Mead

p.s.  I do support your work by the way!! I want to get a copy of your
book...  do I just order it?

Want to come to Charlotte and give a talk??? we would love to have you
visit.  Our house is full of cats, dogs, and Parrots; other than that
it is rather peaceful!