Theos-Talk Archives (June 2005 Message tt00268)

Anand ignores the following 5 pieces of evidence
and what they indicate.

I think this should be a "warning" to all readers
to be wary of other assertions by Anand.

Anand should remember that THERE IS NO RELIGION
(BELIEF, OPINION) HIGHER THAN TRUTH.

=================================================

I present below a summary of the historical
records/evidence that Gregory Tillett has
presented showing Leadbeater was born in 1854:

(1) British marriage records indicate that
Leadbeater's parents were married on May 26, 1853.

(2) Leadbeater's own birth record indicates that he
was born on February 16, 1854.

[NOTE: Connecting the facts presented in (1) and (2),
one can see that Leadbeater was born about 9 months
after his parents were married. Not surprising in
light of known facts about human reproduction.]

(3) Leadbeater's mother gave his age [confirming the 1854 birthdate]
when registering her husband's death.

(4) In the Anglican diocesan records, Leadbeater gave his birth date
[1854] on his application for ordination in the Church of England

(5) In the census return submitted by Leadbeater in 1881, he stated
as Head of the Household that his age was 27 (i.e. born in 1854),

I would suggest that these FIVE historical records give us THE MEANS
to ascertain what year Leadbeater was born.

It is possible that one record might contain some kind of error or
mistake but to suggest or maintain that 5 SEPARATE records (made
years apart)are ALL wrong, INCLUDING records completed by Leadbeater
and his mother, is, to say the least, not a rational and sensible
hypothesis.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc