posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 10:25 PM
Originally posted by Flux8
reply to post by applebiter
Generally, to build a more complete model/hypothesis one needs to go back to the earliest source for evaluation, which in this case is not the
Judeo-Christian mythologies. Therefore, the theosophical aspect of your hypothesis seems to be primarily built on selective evidence. But then
again, isn't all evidence selective?
Flux8 what are you implying here?
Theosophy in fact teaches that most Judeo-Christian doctrine is indeed based on earlier Chaldean, if not Vedic(Aryan) theology.
In fact Theosophy has often been cited as Anti-semitic (besides the unfortunate eugenics exercises of the Nazis, who conveniently and erroneously
adapted theosophist teachings of a progenitor Aryan root race), Theosophy's founder Blavatsky has herself numerously taken to task the
Judeo-Christian appropriation and vulgarization of esoteric Babylonian and Mesopotamian doctrine and has shown how they made an absolute phalocentric
God, 'Jod-He-Vau-He' or Jehowah, of the much earlier Chaldean concept and verb 'Eue' or 'Eva' or ' to be', an allusion to the differentiation
of the sexes(spiritualistically and noumenally) in the seminal rounds of Manvantaric creation...our garden Eve stems from this as well.
Suggest "The Secret Doctrine" for a thorough evaluation of proto-religions, and how they have been corrupted by later Judeo-Christian and
Kabbalistic pretensions, and of course some great insights into Anthropogenesis.