Isis Unveiled(Holy Writ)
Oct 08, 1996 05:11 AM
Talking with Dr. Alan Bain, Jerry wrote:
>You may be absolutely right about Abrantes, his entire purpose
>may be to discredit ISIS and is not engaged in truth seeking. If
>this is so, he will sooner or later convince himself that he has
>succeeded in discrediting ISIS regardless of what we may have to
>say. But I'm not absolutely sure this is his motivation. If his
>motivation is to evangelize, then I think he is intelligent
>enough to quickly find out that he is wasting his time here.
My motivation is discuss some topics covered in Isis Unveiled, that
I could not understand, or I suppose to be wrong. Several times HPB
refers to christian doctrine, and only for this reason (not to
evangelize anyone...) I expose this doctrine quoting passages from
Catechism and Holy Writ. Several times HPB refers to early christian
readings, and only for this reason I reproduce some texts from them.
Please don`t feel obligated to answer all my questions, I am not a
scholar, and sometimes people have not enough patient to talk with a
humble and modest man.
>1)As we have discussed before, HPB distinguishes between
>"Nazara" and a "Nazoria" both words were translated "Nazarene"
>by the early Christian fathers--thus the confusion. The former
>denotes the city of Nazareth, and the latter denotes a mystical
>sect of Jews who built the town of Nazara that later became known
>as Nazareth. HPB's point is that Tischendorf's translation and
>the Syric text *do* make the distinction between "Nazara" and
>"Nazoria" and are saying that Jesus was a Nazoria (i.e. a Notzri,
>a member of the Naziereate [Nazarene] sect), not necessarily a
>Nazara (i.e. one who is from or was born in Nazareth:
HPB reproduces tha translation of Tischendorf, at his greek translation
that refers to Luke 4:34 as "Iesou Nazarene" and syriac text we read
"Iasua, thou, oh nazarene". Both are translated as the same ambiguous
term "Nazarene". These translations did not use the term "Nazoria" or
a member of the Naziereate [Nazarene] sect. So these passages can not
be used to clarify the meaning of the word Nazarene.
>In 1Corinthians, ii. 9, a passage is quoted as Holy
>Scripture, which is not found in the Old Testament as all,
>but which is taken, as Origin and Jerome state, from an
>apocryphal work "The Revelation of Elias" (Origen: Tract.xxxv.).
I mentioned that this passage is present in Isaiah 64:3 and Jerry
correctly conclude that the two passages look very different. I make an
error, the correct passage is Isaiah64:4
But, as it is written, "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the
heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him,"
From of old no one has heard or perceived by the ear, no eye has seen
a God besides thee, who works for those who wait for him
>Whatever words may have been put into the
>mouths of Jesus, Peter, John, Paul, and others, there is not
>a single act of adoration recorded on their part, nor did
>Jesus himself ever declare his identity with his Father ISIS II,192
HPB and you Jerry seems to reject the idea that we can find passages
in Holy Writ where for instance, <John make a single act of adoration
recorded on their part>. Read John 1:1-14 RSV
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made
through him, and without him was not anything made that was made...
He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world
knew him not. He came to his own home, and his own people received him
not. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave
power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the
will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.And the Word
became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth;
I also already mentioned John 10:30 <MY FATHER WHO HAS GIVEN THEM TO ME
IS GREATER THAN ALL, and no one can snatch them out of the Fathers care.
My Father and I are one> I did not take this passage out of context as
you said. This passage expresses that identity of Jesus with God (gospel of
John is the most clear gospel about it) and at same time expresses that
the Son and the Father are different persons. This is a paradox, but it
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application