Aug 28, 1996 02:17 PM
>>BOOK III, chapter V (191,217) page 210 HPB states that Paul was
>>the only apostle to receive gnosis from Jesus. But at chapter
>>III (116,145) page 134 she says that Jesus taught magi to John,
>>and at chapter IV (153,185) page 167 she says that Jesus teach
>>his gnosis to SOME disciples (more than one disciple).
>>So, what did HPB want to say? How many disciples receive Jesus
>>gnosis from Jesus himself?
Jerry, you referred to two passages that I mentioned: "There was but one
apostle of Jesus worthy of that name, and that was Paul."(II:241) and
"with the exception, perhaps of John, it does not seem that he (Jesus) had
initiated any other apostle". (II: 147)
The last one is not difficult to find because if my page 210=your page 241,
and my page 134=your page 147. Then my page 167 probably is around your
180 and 198 pages (around 13 and 31 pages of difference) at chapter IV.
Yes, you are correct. I mistaked when mentioned that II:241 there is the
word <gnosis>. But indeed this seems clear to me, because at chapter II
(start60, end 110) page 86 HPB mentions that Paul was initiated in greek
mysteries. She also refers to 2Cor12:3, and cites Cyril of Jerusalem
(Cathecheses xiv,26), concluding that Paul was initiated by Jesus through
visions (even though the word <gnosis> never appear at this passages...)
>1. She considers the Biblical Jesus to be mythical, patterned
>after other mythical and legendary figures.
So HPB are saying that ALL four gospels are a forgery. This person,
biblical Jesus never existed. She recognices only the existence of another
Jesus, living one century before, as told by Toldoth. Correct?
Toldoth have a passsage that says:
>Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath.
>When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke, for when he had possessed the power he
>had pronounced by the Ineffable Name that no tree should hold him. He had failed to
>pronounce the prohibition over the carob-stalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and
>on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, "His
>body shall not remain all night upon the tree." They buried him outside the city.
Observe the passage <death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover>.
This is exactly what we read in Matthew 27:45 and Matthew 27:62. What is
the most ancient text? Toldoth or gospel of Matthew? What did <pattern after
other mythical and legendary figures>?
>I think that HPB are opposing two heresies within the judaism:
>the old nazarenes (Peter is included here) and the new heresy:
>the christianity (Jesus is included here, HPB says that Jesus
>was a nazaren reformer).
>Yes. I think HPB is saying that the historical Jesus of Syria
>was a Nazarene reformer.
This is not the biblical Jesus, but the talmudic Jesus, correct?
>BUT at page 139 HPB describes the gnostic system of
>Basilides,the follower of doctrines of Matthew and Peter (???)
>(references to Clement of Alexandria, Stromata VII,XVII) and
>refers to him as teaching the correct doctrine. So, now, Peter
>(Basilides reflects his doctrines in accordance with Clement)
>and Jesus (the false Messiah of Codex) has the same doctrine. We
>have a problem here do you agree?
>You will have to quote the passage so that I can find it, else I
>cannot comment on it specifically.
The passage: "Basilides stated that he took ALL HIS DOCTRINES from the
apostle Matthew and PETER, through Glaucias, his disciple" chapter III
(start116,end145) page 139. Probably it corresponds to your page II:152.
Jerry mentions that the gospel of Matthew used by Basilides was
different from that used by church. But this is not the point. The point
here is that HPB recognices that Basilides preached the correct doctrine
and follows the doctrines that learned from Peter.
But at BOOK III,chapter IV (153,185) page 163 HPB
writes that Peter, the apostle of circumcision, preached the doctrines
opposed to Paul, and describes 2Peter 2:18-31 as a example of such discord.
At chapter II(60,110) page 87 she states that Peter saw Paul as magician,
a man polluted with the gnosis, the wisdom of greek mysteries. Again she
opposes Paul and Peter.
>Unveiled Isis BOOK III chapter III (116-145) page 119 HPB
>reproduce Toldoth that states that Peter was contemporary to
>Jesus. Some lines before, at same chapter HPB refers to Christ
>of Paul (who is the authorship???) and agrees that Peter lived
>under Nero reign. So Jesus never can be lived one century
>The Talmudic Peter lived one century before. The Biblical Peter
>lived under Nero's reign.
In another mail I develop the argument that biblical Peter founded the
church in Rome at first century, AND NO RESPECTABLE HISTORIAN REFUSE
THIS FACT. So, biblical Peter lived at first century. And HPB recognices,
mentioning the Talmud that Jesus and Peter was contemporany. So how can
she neglect the historic evidences about Peter? (the references are given
in another e-mail)
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application