Theos-Talk Archives (October 2004 Message tt00249)

Jerry wrote to Dallas in part:

"But what was your response to Paul Johnson 
aside from saying that Indian Theosophists 
would disagree with his points and assert 
that he hasn't responded to Daniel Caldwell's 
"House of Cards" essay? Actually Paul responded 
to Daniel's essay. He also responded to 
my objections, which are probably archived 
somewhere. If you have specific errors of fact,
errors of misreading, errors of interpretation 
etc., or endeavor to point out, or make 
further comments upon Daniel's or my 
criticisms, then I think you would be doing a 
service to inquirers into Theosophy to make
these alternative views known. . . ." 

"So to return to Paul Johnson's TMR: I think 
it would be missing an important point if we 
ignore the fact that his book is a rather
self-evident attempt to separate Theosophical 
history from its own self-created myths. I 
agree with you that his attempt is wanting, but
it was a bold attempt, nevertheless."

Yes, Paul did reply to my critique.

If you go to:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnson.htm

you will see my first critique titled
K. Paul Johnson's House of Cards?

Scroll down this webpage and you will
see Paul's reply titled:

Strain at a Gnat, Swallow a Camel

In turn, I replied to some of Paul's comments.

I wrote:

"In Strain at a Gnat, Swallow a Camel, K. Paul Johnson attempted to 
rebut some of my criticisms (see my work K. Paul Johnson's House of 
Cards?) of his thesis concerning the Theosophical Masters. I counted 
numerous fallacies, mistakes and misleading arguments in Johnson's 
rebuttal."

I show in detail how two of Paul's rebuttal arguments
are fallacious.

Interested readers can see my reasoning for this at:

A Closer Look at Some of K. Paul Johnson's Arguments
Concerning H.S. Olcott's Testimony about the Masters

http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnsonparanormal3.htm

Another exploration of some of Paul's ideas can
be found at:

"I view M. as a composite character...."
http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnsonmcomposite.htm

For several years, I have been hoping Paul or someone who shares his
views would be willing to discuss the further points that
I bring up "A Closer Look at Some of K. Paul Johnson's Arguments
Concerning H.S. Olcott's Testimony about the Masters."

I believe these points help one to go to the heart of the matter 
concerning the existence of the Mahatmas and the testimonies by those 
early Theosophists who claimed contact with these Adepts.

Maybe Jerry, Dallas, Paul or some other reader will comment on the 
points and issues I raise in "A Closer Look at Some of ...."
http://blavatskyarchives.com/johnsonparanormal3.htm

Daniel
http://blavatskystudycenter.org

P.S.

Readers may also find other relevant material at:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/masterschart.htm

http://blavatskyarchives.com/mastersencounterswith.htm