View allAll Photos Tagged Existence
While trying to find secondhand pieces for my and Dracula’s Halloween costumes this week I came across these pants. I am not a pants wearer usually. You will almost always find me in some sort of running shorts, skirts, dresses, and soft layers. The pants are made of a fiber called Lyocell and according to Wikipedia’s article it is a “semi-synthetic fiber made from wood pulp, typically from trees like eucalyptus, birch, and oak. The natural cellulose from the wood is dissolved and spun into a strong fiber, which is then used to create fabric. Lyocell is known for being a sustainable option due to its production process, which recycles solvents and water, and its biodegradable nature.” I honestly hadn’t done much research on it until today and I am very curious. As long as I remember I have hated pants. (Except JNCO jeans and wide corduroy skater pants in the 90’s.) As a woman with some big soft curves everywhere; pants and the constant changing of what’s available due to trends has been the bane of my existence. I have tried over and over to wear jeans and it feels like a prison for my legs. As I age and my body’s cycles (especially that of bloat) have become more apparent; comfort is almost always paramount now. These pants are loose and truly buttery soft feeling. I know they lack structure and border on pajama pants, but I have already found another used pair in blue on eBay I love them so much. I see these being a consistent wardrobe piece for a long while. They have a lot of stretch in the waist which I am really enjoying. Oh and they are from brand Knox Rose. I paired them two different ways. Once with a boxy cropped short sleeve shirt I made out of a thrifted table cloth, a sort of tea time garden party pastel blazer with the cutest little floral buttons, my purple suede sneakers, and a wooden disc necklace. Everything in that outfit was thrifted. The second time was to go out to dinner and a short walk from our home to the tavern. I wore my black Tom’s (bought new several years ago), a sage green eyelet spaghetti strap tank top (Of an unknown brand and fabric. Although I’d hazard a guess at fully synthetic and fast fashion, but was bought secondhand.), a burnout velvet blue robe with a sort of warm colored floral imagery all over it and fringe (thrifted), and a large plastic amber pendant necklace (thrifted for TEN CENTS CSD 20 yrs ago). I really love finding a new to me piece of clothing that checks a lot of boxes for comfort and style. If you’ve made it this far through my style and secondhand shopping rambling I just want to say this still feels sort of awkward for me to post this sort of stuff here. It’s funny to me because I used to make YouTube videos where I changed on camera and posted almost 6 days a week with photos of my face and body. I am going to consider this a trial period to see if I find a connection here for this stuff. I really appreciate anyone taking the time to listen, as it were, when I talk at length about stuff that is important to me. <3
In monotheism, God is conceived of as the Supreme Being and principal object of faith.[3] The concept of God as described by most theologians includes the attributes of omniscience (infinite knowledge), omnipotence (unlimited power), omnipresence (present everywhere), divine simplicity, and as having an eternal and necessary existence. Many theologians also describe God as being omnibenevolent (perfectly good), and all loving.
God is most often held to be non-corporeal,[3] and to be without any human biological sex,[4][5] yet the concept of God actively creating the universe (as opposed to passively)[6] has caused many religions to describe God using masculine terminology, using such terms as "Him" or "Father". Furthermore, some religions (such as Judaism) attribute only a purely grammatical "gender" to God.[7]
In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. In atheism, God is not believed to exist, while God is deemed unknown or unknowable within the context of agnosticism. God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[3] Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God.[8]
There are many names for God, and different names are attached to different cultural ideas about God's identity and attributes. In the ancient Egyptian era of Atenism, possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this deity was called Aten,[9] premised on being the one "true" Supreme Being and Creator of the Universe.[10] In the Hebrew Bible and Judaism, "He Who Is", "I Am that I Am", and the tetragrammaton YHWH (Hebrew: יהוה, which means: "I am who I am"; "He Who Exists") are used as names of God, while Yahweh and Jehovah are sometimes used in Christianity as vocalizations of YHWH. In the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, God, consubstantial in three persons, is called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Judaism, it is common to refer to God by the titular names Elohim or Adonai, the latter of which is believed by some scholars to descend from the Egyptian Aten.[11][12][13][14][15] In Islam, the name Allah, "Al-El", or "Al-Elah" ("the God") is used, while Muslims also have a multitude of titular names for God. In Hinduism, Brahman is often considered a monistic deity.[16] Other religions have names for God, for instance, Baha in the Bahá'í Faith,[17] Waheguru in Sikhism,[18] and Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism.[19]
The many different conceptions of God, and competing claims as to God's characteristics, aims, and actions, have led to the development of ideas of omnitheism, pandeism,[20][21] or a perennial philosophy, which postulates that there is one underlying theological truth, of which all religions express a partial understanding, and as to which "the devout in the various great world religions are in fact worshipping that one God, but through different, overlapping concepts or mental images of Him."[22]
Contents [hide]
1Etymology and usage
2General conceptions
2.1Oneness
2.2Theism, deism and pantheism
2.3Other concepts
3Non-theistic views
3.1Agnosticism and atheism
3.2Anthropomorphism
4Existence
5Specific attributes
5.1Names
5.2Gender
5.3Relationship with creation
6Depiction
6.1Zoroastrianism
6.2Islam
6.3Judaism
6.4Christianity
7Theological approaches
8Distribution of belief
9See also
9.1In specific religions
10References
11Further reading
12External links
Etymology and usage
The Mesha Stele bears the earliest known reference (840 BCE) to the Israelite God Yahweh.
Main article: God (word)
The earliest written form of the Germanic word God (always, in this usage, capitalized[23]) comes from the 6th-century Christian Codex Argenteus. The English word itself is derived from the Proto-Germanic * ǥuđan. The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form * ǵhu-tó-m was likely based on the root * ǵhau(ə)-, which meant either "to call" or "to invoke".[24] The Germanic words for God were originally neuter—applying to both genders—but during the process of the Christianization of the Germanic peoples from their indigenous Germanic paganism, the words became a masculine syntactic form.[25]
The word 'Allah' in Arabic calligraphy
In the English language, the capitalized form of God continues to represent a distinction between monotheistic "God" and "gods" in polytheism.[26][27] The English word God and its counterparts in other languages are normally used for any and all conceptions and, in spite of significant differences between religions, the term remains an English translation common to all. The same holds for Hebrew El, but in Judaism, God is also given a proper name, the tetragrammaton YHWH, in origin possibly the name of an Edomite or Midianite deity, Yahweh. In many translations of the Bible, when the word LORD is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton.[28]
Allāh (Arabic: الله) is the Arabic term with no plural used by Muslims and Arabic speaking Christians and Jews meaning "The God" (with a capital G), while "ʾilāh" (Arabic: إله) is the term used for a deity or a god in general.[29][30][31] God may also be given a proper name in monotheistic currents of Hinduism which emphasize the personal nature of God, with early references to his name as Krishna-Vasudeva in Bhagavata or later Vishnu and Hari.[32]
Ahura Mazda is the name for God used in Zoroastrianism. "Mazda", or rather the Avestan stem-form Mazdā-, nominative Mazdå, reflects Proto-Iranian *Mazdāh (female). It is generally taken to be the proper name of the spirit, and like its Sanskrit cognate medhā, means "intelligence" or "wisdom". Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect Proto-Indo-Iranian *mazdhā-, from Proto-Indo-European mn̩sdʰeh1, literally meaning "placing (dʰeh1) one's mind (*mn̩-s)", hence "wise".[33]
Waheguru (Punjabi: vāhigurū) is a term most often used in Sikhism to refer to God. It means "Wonderful Teacher" in the Punjabi language. Vāhi (a Middle Persian borrowing) means "wonderful" and guru (Sanskrit: guru) is a term denoting "teacher". Waheguru is also described by some as an experience of ecstasy which is beyond all descriptions. The most common usage of the word "Waheguru" is in the greeting Sikhs use with each other:
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh
Wonderful Lord's Khalsa, Victory is to the Wonderful Lord.
Baha, the "greatest" name for God in the Baha'i faith, is Arabic for "All-Glorious".
General conceptions
Main article: Conceptions of God
There is no clear consensus on the nature or even the existence of God.[34] The Abrahamic conceptions of God include the monotheistic definition of God in Judaism, the trinitarian view of Christians, and the Islamic concept of God. The dharmic religions differ in their view of the divine: views of God in Hinduism vary by region, sect, and caste, ranging from monotheistic to polytheistic. Divinity was recognized by the historical Buddha, particularly Śakra and Brahma. However, other sentient beings, including gods, can at best only play a supportive role in one's personal path to salvation. Conceptions of God in the latter developments of the Mahayana tradition give a more prominent place to notions of the divine.[citation needed]
Oneness
Main articles: Monotheism and Henotheism
The Trinity is the belief that God is composed of The Father, The Son (embodied metaphysically in the physical realm by Jesus), and The Holy Spirit.
Monotheists hold that there is only one god, and may claim that the one true god is worshiped in different religions under different names. The view that all theists actually worship the same god, whether they know it or not, is especially emphasized in Hinduism[35] and Sikhism.[36] In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity describes God as one God in three persons. The Trinity comprises The Father, The Son (embodied metaphysically by Jesus), and The Holy Spirit.[37] Islam's most fundamental concept is tawhid (meaning "oneness" or "uniqueness"). God is described in the Quran as: "Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him."[38][39] Muslims repudiate the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, comparing it to polytheism. In Islam, God is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, and are not expected to visualize God.[40]
Henotheism is the belief and worship of a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.[41]
Theism, deism and pantheism
Main articles: Theism, Deism, and Pantheism
Theism generally holds that God exists realistically, objectively, and independently of human thought; that God created and sustains everything; that God is omnipotent and eternal; and that God is personal and interacting with the universe through, for example, religious experience and the prayers of humans.[42] Theism holds that God is both transcendent and immanent; thus, God is simultaneously infinite and in some way present in the affairs of the world.[43] Not all theists subscribe to all of these propositions, but each usually subscribes to some of them (see, by way of comparison, family resemblance).[42] Catholic theology holds that God is infinitely simple and is not involuntarily subject to time. Most theists hold that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, although this belief raises questions about God's responsibility for evil and suffering in the world. Some theists ascribe to God a self-conscious or purposeful limiting of omnipotence, omniscience, or benevolence. Open Theism, by contrast, asserts that, due to the nature of time, God's omniscience does not mean the deity can predict the future. Theism is sometimes used to refer in general to any belief in a god or gods, i.e., monotheism or polytheism.[44][45]
"God blessing the seventh day", a watercolor painting depicting God, by William Blake (1757 – 1827)
Deism holds that God is wholly transcendent: God exists, but does not intervene in the world beyond what was necessary to create it.[43] In this view, God is not anthropomorphic, and neither answers prayers nor produces miracles. Common in Deism is a belief that God has no interest in humanity and may not even be aware of humanity. Pandeism and Panendeism, respectively, combine Deism with the Pantheistic or Panentheistic beliefs.[21][46][47] Pandeism is proposed to explain as to Deism why God would create a universe and then abandon it,[48] and as to Pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.[48][49]
Pantheism holds that God is the universe and the universe is God, whereas Panentheism holds that God contains, but is not identical to, the Universe.[50] It is also the view of the Liberal Catholic Church; Theosophy; some views of Hinduism except Vaishnavism, which believes in panentheism; Sikhism; some divisions of Neopaganism and Taoism, along with many varying denominations and individuals within denominations. Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, paints a pantheistic/panentheistic view of God—which has wide acceptance in Hasidic Judaism, particularly from their founder The Baal Shem Tov—but only as an addition to the Jewish view of a personal god, not in the original pantheistic sense that denies or limits persona to God.[citation needed]
Other concepts
Dystheism, which is related to theodicy, is a form of theism which holds that God is either not wholly good or is fully malevolent as a consequence of the problem of evil. One such example comes from Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, in which Ivan Karamazov rejects God on the grounds that he allows children to suffer.[51]
In modern times, some more abstract concepts have been developed, such as process theology and open theism. The contemporaneous French philosopher Michel Henry has however proposed a phenomenological approach and definition of God as phenomenological essence of Life.[52]
God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[3] These attributes were all supported to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologian philosophers, including Maimonides,[53] Augustine of Hippo,[53] and Al-Ghazali,[8] respectively.
Non-theistic views
See also: Evolutionary origin of religions and Evolutionary psychology of religion
Non-theist views about God also vary. Some non-theists avoid the concept of God, whilst accepting that it is significant to many; other non-theists understand God as a symbol of human values and aspirations. The nineteenth-century English atheist Charles Bradlaugh declared that he refused to say "There is no God", because "the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation";[54] he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian god. Stephen Jay Gould proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called "non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the supernatural, such as those relating to the existence and nature of God, are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.[55]
Another view, advanced by Richard Dawkins, is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that "a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference."[56] Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could disprove the existence of a Creator (not necessarily a God) would be the discovery that the universe is infinitely old.[57]
Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow state in their book, The Grand Design, that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings.[58] Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.[59]
Agnosticism and atheism
Agnosticism is the view that, the truth values of certain claims – especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether God, the divine or the supernatural exist – are unknown and perhaps unknowable.[60][61][62]
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, or a God.[63][64] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[65]
Anthropomorphism
Main article: Anthropomorphism
Pascal Boyer argues that while there is a wide array of supernatural concepts found around the world, in general, supernatural beings tend to behave much like people. The construction of gods and spirits like persons is one of the best known traits of religion. He cites examples from Greek mythology, which is, in his opinion, more like a modern soap opera than other religious systems.[66] Bertrand du Castel and Timothy Jurgensen demonstrate through formalization that Boyer's explanatory model matches physics' epistemology in positing not directly observable entities as intermediaries.[67] Anthropologist Stewart Guthrie contends that people project human features onto non-human aspects of the world because it makes those aspects more familiar. Sigmund Freud also suggested that god concepts are projections of one's father.[68]
Likewise, Émile Durkheim was one of the earliest to suggest that gods represent an extension of human social life to include supernatural beings. In line with this reasoning, psychologist Matt Rossano contends that when humans began living in larger groups, they may have created gods as a means of enforcing morality. In small groups, morality can be enforced by social forces such as gossip or reputation. However, it is much harder to enforce morality using social forces in much larger groups. Rossano indicates that by including ever-watchful gods and spirits, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups.[69]
Existence
Main article: Existence of God
St. Thomas Aquinas summed up five main arguments as proofs for God's existence.
Isaac Newton saw the existence of a Creator necessary in the movement of astronomical objects.
Arguments about the existence of God typically include empirical, deductive, and inductive types. Different views include that: "God does not exist" (strong atheism); "God almost certainly does not exist" (de facto atheism); "no one knows whether God exists" (agnosticism[70]);"God exists, but this cannot be proven or disproven" (de facto theism); and that "God exists and this can be proven" (strong theism).[55]
Countless arguments have been proposed to prove the existence of God.[71] Some of the most notable arguments are the Five Ways of Aquinas, the Argument from Desire proposed by C.S. Lewis, and the Ontological Argument formulated both by St. Anselm and René Descartes.[72]
St. Anselm's approach was to define God as, "that than which nothing greater can be conceived". Famed pantheist philosopher Baruch Spinoza would later carry this idea to its extreme: "By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence." For Spinoza, the whole of the natural universe is made of one substance, God, or its equivalent, Nature.[73] His proof for the existence of God was a variation of the Ontological argument.[74]
Scientist Isaac Newton saw God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.[75] Nevertheless, he rejected polymath Leibniz' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator. In Query 31 of the Opticks, Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention:
For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.[76]
St. Thomas believed that the existence of God is self-evident in itself, but not to us. "Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects."[77] St. Thomas believed that the existence of God can be demonstrated. Briefly in the Summa theologiae and more extensively in the Summa contra Gentiles, he considered in great detail five arguments for the existence of God, widely known as the quinque viae (Five Ways).
For the original text of the five proofs, see quinque viae
Motion: Some things undoubtedly move, though cannot cause their own motion. Since there can be no infinite chain of causes of motion, there must be a First Mover not moved by anything else, and this is what everyone understands by God.
Causation: As in the case of motion, nothing can cause itself, and an infinite chain of causation is impossible, so there must be a First Cause, called God.
Existence of necessary and the unnecessary: Our experience includes things certainly existing but apparently unnecessary. Not everything can be unnecessary, for then once there was nothing and there would still be nothing. Therefore, we are compelled to suppose something that exists necessarily, having this necessity only from itself; in fact itself the cause for other things to exist.
Gradation: If we can notice a gradation in things in the sense that some things are more hot, good, etc., there must be a superlative that is the truest and noblest thing, and so most fully existing. This then, we call God (Note: Thomas does not ascribe actual qualities to God Himself).
Ordered tendencies of nature: A direction of actions to an end is noticed in all bodies following natural laws. Anything without awareness tends to a goal under the guidance of one who is aware. This we call God (Note that even when we guide objects, in Thomas's view, the source of all our knowledge comes from God as well).[78]
Alister McGrath, a formerly atheistic scientist and theologian who has been highly critical of Richard Dawkins' version of atheism
Some theologians, such as the scientist and theologian A.E. McGrath, argue that the existence of God is not a question that can be answered using the scientific method.[79][80] Agnostic Stephen Jay Gould argues that science and religion are not in conflict and do not overlap.[81]
Some findings in the fields of cosmology, evolutionary biology and neuroscience are interpreted by some atheists (including Lawrence M. Krauss and Sam Harris) as evidence that God is an imaginary entity only, with no basis in reality.[82][83][84] These atheists claim that a single, omniscient God who is imagined to have created the universe and is particularly attentive to the lives of humans has been imagined, embellished and promulgated in a trans-generational manner.[85] Richard Dawkins interprets such findings not only as a lack of evidence for the material existence of such a God, but as extensive evidence to the contrary.[55] However, his views are opposed by some theologians and scientists including Alister McGrath, who argues that existence of God is compatible with science.[86]
Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.[59]
Specific attributes
Different religious traditions assign differing (though often similar) attributes and characteristics to God, including expansive powers and abilities, psychological characteristics, gender characteristics, and preferred nomenclature. The assignment of these attributes often differs according to the conceptions of God in the culture from which they arise. For example, attributes of God in Christianity, attributes of God in Islam, and the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy in Judaism share certain similarities arising from their common roots.
Names
Main article: Names of God
99 names of Allah, in Chinese Sini (script)
The word God is "one of the most complex and difficult in the English language." In the Judeo-Christian tradition, "the Bible has been the principal source of the conceptions of God". That the Bible "includes many different images, concepts, and ways of thinking about" God has resulted in perpetual "disagreements about how God is to be conceived and understood".[87]
Throughout the Hebrew and Christian Bibles there are many names for God. One of them is Elohim. Another one is El Shaddai, meaning "God Almighty".[88] A third notable name is El Elyon, which means "The Most High God".[89]
God is described and referred in the Quran and hadith by certain names or attributes, the most common being Al-Rahman, meaning "Most Compassionate" and Al-Rahim, meaning "Most Merciful" (See Names of God in Islam).[90]
Supreme soul
The Brahma Kumaris use the term "Supreme Soul" to refer to God. They see God as incorporeal and eternal, and regard him as a point of living light like human souls, but without a physical body, as he does not enter the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. God is seen as the perfect and constant embodiment of all virtues, powers and values and that He is the unconditionally loving Father of all souls, irrespective of their religion, gender, or culture.[91]
Vaishnavism, a tradition in Hinduism, has list of titles and names of Krishna.
Gender
Main article: Gender of God
The gender of God may be viewed as either a literal or an allegorical aspect of a deity who, in classical western philosophy, transcends bodily form.[92][93] Polytheistic religions commonly attribute to each of the gods a gender, allowing each to interact with any of the others, and perhaps with humans, sexually. In most monotheistic religions, God has no counterpart with which to relate sexually. Thus, in classical western philosophy the gender of this one-and-only deity is most likely to be an analogical statement of how humans and God address, and relate to, each other. Namely, God is seen as begetter of the world and revelation which corresponds to the active (as opposed to the receptive) role in sexual intercourse.[6]
Biblical sources usually refer to God using male words, except Genesis 1:26-27,[94][95] Psalm 123:2-3, and Luke 15:8-10 (female); Hosea 11:3-4, Deuteronomy 32:18, Isaiah 66:13, Isaiah 49:15, Isaiah 42:14, Psalm 131:2 (a mother); Deuteronomy 32:11-12 (a mother eagle); and Matthew 23:37 and Luke 13:34 (a mother hen).
Relationship with creation
See also: Creator deity, Prayer, and Worship
And Elohim Created Adam by William Blake, c.1795
Prayer plays a significant role among many believers. Muslims believe that the purpose of existence is to worship God.[96][97] He is viewed as a personal God and there are no intermediaries, such as clergy, to contact God. Prayer often also includes supplication and asking forgiveness. God is often believed to be forgiving. For example, a hadith states God would replace a sinless people with one who sinned but still asked repentance.[98] Christian theologian Alister McGrath writes that there are good reasons to suggest that a "personal god" is integral to the Christian outlook, but that one has to understand it is an analogy. "To say that God is like a person is to affirm the divine ability and willingness to relate to others. This does not imply that God is human, or located at a specific point in the universe."[99]
Adherents of different religions generally disagree as to how to best worship God and what is God's plan for mankind, if there is one. There are different approaches to reconciling the contradictory claims of monotheistic religions. One view is taken by exclusivists, who believe they are the chosen people or have exclusive access to absolute truth, generally through revelation or encounter with the Divine, which adherents of other religions do not. Another view is religious pluralism. A pluralist typically believes that his religion is the right one, but does not deny the partial truth of other religions. An example of a pluralist view in Christianity is supersessionism, i.e., the belief that one's religion is the fulfillment of previous religions. A third approach is relativistic inclusivism, where everybody is seen as equally right; an example being universalism: the doctrine that salvation is eventually available for everyone. A fourth approach is syncretism, mixing different elements from different religions. An example of syncretism is the New Age movement.
Jews and Christians believe that humans are created in the likeness of God, and are the center, crown and key to God's creation, stewards for God, supreme over everything else God had made (Gen 1:26); for this reason, humans are in Christianity called the "Children of God".[100]
Depiction
God is defined as incorporeal,[3] and invisible from direct sight, and thus cannot be portrayed in a literal visual image.
The respective principles of religions may or may not permit them to use images (which are entirely symbolic) to represent God in art or in worship .
Zoroastrianism
Ahura Mazda (depiction is on the right, with high crown) presents Ardashir I (left) with the ring of kingship. (Relief at Naqsh-e Rustam, 3rd century CE)
During the early Parthian Empire, Ahura Mazda was visually represented for worship. This practice ended during the beginning of the Sassanid empire. Zoroastrian iconoclasm, which can be traced to the end of the Parthian period and the beginning of the Sassanid, eventually put an end to the use of all images of Ahura Mazda in worship. However, Ahura Mazda continued to be symbolized by a dignified male figure, standing or on horseback which is found in Sassanian investiture.[101]
Islam
Further information: God in Islam
Muslims believe that God (Allah) is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of His creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, are not expected to visualize God.[40]
Judaism
At least some Jews do not use any image for God, since God is the unimageable Being who cannot be represented in material forms.[102] In some samples of Jewish Art, however, sometimes God, or at least His Intervention, is indicated by a Hand Of God symbol, which represents the bath Kol (literally "daughter of a voice") or Voice of God;[103] this use of the Hand Of God is carried over to Christian Art.
Christianity
This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (April 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Early Christians believed that the words of the Gospel of John 1:18: "No man has seen God at any time" and numerous other statements were meant to apply not only to God, but to all attempts at the depiction of God.[104]
Use of the symbolic Hand of God in the Ascension from the Drogo Sacramentary, c. 850
However, later on the Hand of God symbol is found several times in the only ancient synagogue with a large surviving decorative scheme, the Dura Europos Synagogue of the mid-3rd century, and was probably adopted into Early Christian art from Jewish art. It was common in Late Antique art in both East and West, and remained the main way of symbolizing the actions or approval of God the Father in the West until about the end of the Romanesque period. It also represents the bath Kol (literally "daughter of a voice") or voice of God,[103] just like in Jewish Art.
In situations, such as the Baptism of Christ, where a specific representation of God the Father was indicated, the Hand of God was used, with increasing freedom from the Carolingian period until the end of the Romanesque. This motif now, since the discovery of the 3rd century Dura Europos synagogue, seems to have been borrowed from Jewish art, and is found in Christian art almost from its beginnings.
The use of religious images in general continued to increase up to the end of the 7th century, to the point that in 695, upon assuming the throne, Byzantine emperor Justinian II put an image of Christ on the obverse side of his gold coins, resulting in a rift which ended the use of Byzantine coin types in the Islamic world.[105] However, the increase in religious imagery did not include depictions of God the Father. For instance, while the eighty second canon of the Council of Trullo in 692 did not specifically condemn images of The Father, it suggested that icons of Christ were preferred over Old Testament shadows and figures.[106]
The beginning of the 8th century witnessed the suppression and destruction of religious icons as the period of Byzantine iconoclasm (literally image-breaking) started. Emperor Leo III (717–741), suppressed the use of icons by imperial edict of the Byzantine Empire, presumably due to a military loss which he attributed to the undue veneration of icons.[107] The edict (which was issued without consulting the Church) forbade the veneration of religious images but did not apply to other forms of art, including the image of the emperor, or religious symbols such as the cross.[108] Theological arguments against icons then began to appear with iconoclasts arguing that icons could not represent both the divine and the human natures of Jesus at the same time. In this atmosphere, no public depictions of God the Father were even attempted and such depictions only began to appear two centuries later.
The Second Council of Nicaea in 787 effectively ended the first period of Byzantine iconoclasm and restored the honouring of icons and holy images in general.[109] However, this did not immediately translate into large scale depictions of God the Father. Even supporters of the use of icons in the 8th century, such as Saint John of Damascus, drew a distinction between images of God the Father and those of Christ.
In his treatise On the Divine Images John of Damascus wrote: "In former times, God who is without form or body, could never be depicted. But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see".[110] The implication here is that insofar as God the Father or the Spirit did not become man, visible and tangible, images and portrait icons can not be depicted. So what was true for the whole Trinity before Christ remains true for the Father and the Spirit but not for the Word. John of Damascus wrote:[111]
"If we attempt to make an image of the invisible God, this would be sinful indeed. It is impossible to portray one who is without body:invisible, uncircumscribed and without form."
Around 790 Charlemagne ordered a set of four books that became known as the Libri Carolini (i.e. "Charles' books") to refute what his court mistakenly understood to be the iconoclast decrees of the Byzantine Second Council of Nicaea regarding sacred images. Although not well known during the Middle Ages, these books describe the key elements of the Catholic theological position on sacred images. To the Western Church, images were just objects made by craftsmen, to be utilized for stimulating the senses of the faithful, and to be respected for the sake of the subject represented, not in themselves. The Council of Constantinople (869) (considered ecumenical by the Western Church, but not the Eastern Church) reaffirmed the decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea and helped stamp out any remaining coals of iconoclasm. Specifically, its third canon required the image of Christ to have veneration equal with that of a Gospel book:[112]
We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator and Savior of all people, must be venerated with the same honor as is given the book of the holy Gospels. For as through the language of the words contained in this book all can reach salvation, so, due to the action which these images exercise by their colors, all wise and simple alike, can derive profit from them.
But images of God the Father were not directly addressed in Constantinople in 869. A list of permitted icons was enumerated at this Council, but symbols of God the Father were not among them.[113] However, the general acceptance of icons and holy images began to create an atmosphere in which God the Father could be symbolized.
Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to use a human to symbolize God the Father in Western art.[104] Yet, Western art eventually required some way to illustrate the presence of the Father, so through successive representations a set of artistic styles for symbolizing the Father using a man gradually emerged around the 10th century AD. A rationale for the use of a human is the belief that God created the soul of Man in the image of His own (thus allowing Human to transcend the other animals).
It appears that when early artists designed to represent God the Father, fear and awe restrained them from a usage of the whole human figure. Typically only a small part would be used as the image, usually the hand, or sometimes the face, but rarely a whole human. In many images, the figure of the Son supplants the Father, so a smaller portion of the person of the Father is depicted.[114]
By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French illuminated manuscripts, which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in stained glass church windows in England. Initially the head or bust was usually shown in some form of frame of clouds in the top of the picture space, where the Hand of God had formerly appeared; the Baptism of Christ on the famous baptismal font in Liège of Rainer of Huy is an example from 1118 (a Hand of God is used in another scene). Gradually the amount of the human symbol shown can increase to a half-length figure, then a full-length, usually enthroned, as in Giotto's fresco of c. 1305 in Padua.[115] In the 14th century the Naples Bible carried a depiction of God the Father in the Burning bush. By the early 15th century, the Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry has a considerable number of symbols, including an elderly but tall and elegant full-length figure walking in the Garden of Eden, which show a considerable diversity of apparent ages and dress. The "Gates of Paradise" of the Florence Baptistry by Lorenzo Ghiberti, begun in 1425 use a similar tall full-length symbol for the Father. The Rohan Book of Hours of about 1430 also included depictions of God the Father in half-length human form, which were now becoming standard, and the Hand of God becoming rarer. At the same period other works, like the large Genesis altarpiece by the Hamburg painter Meister Bertram, continued to use the old depiction of Christ as Logos in Genesis scenes. In the 15th century there was a brief fashion for depicting all three persons of the Trinity as similar or identical figures with the usual appearance of Christ.
In an early Venetian school Coronation of the Virgin by Giovanni d'Alemagna and Antonio Vivarini, (c. 1443) The Father is depicted using the symbol consistently used by other artists later, namely a patriarch, with benign, yet powerful countenance and with long white hair and a beard, a depiction largely derived from, and justified by, the near-physical, but still figurative, description of the Ancient of Days.[116]
. ...the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. (Daniel 7:9)
Usage of two Hands of God"(relatively unusual) and the Holy Spirit as a dove in Baptism of Christ, by Verrocchio, 1472
In the Annunciation by Benvenuto di Giovanni in 1470, God the Father is portrayed in the red robe and a hat that resembles that of a Cardinal. However, even in the later part of the 15th century, the symbolic representation of the Father and the Holy Spirit as "hands and dove" continued, e.g. in Verrocchio's Baptism of Christ in 1472.[117]
God the Father with His Right Hand Raised in Blessing, with a triangular halo representing the Trinity, Girolamo dai Libri c. 1555
In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father using an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo (as a reference to the Trinity), or with a papal crown, specially in Northern Renaissance painting. In these depictions The Father may hold a globe or book (to symbolize God's knowledge and as a reference to how knowledge is deemed divine). He is behind and above Christ on the Cross in the Throne of Mercy iconography. A dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit may hover above. Various people from different classes of society, e.g. kings, popes or martyrs may be present in the picture. In a Trinitarian Pietà, God the Father is often symbolized using a man wearing a papal dress and a papal crown, supporting the dead Christ in his arms. They are depicted as floating in heaven with angels who carry the instruments of the Passion.[118]
Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the Jansenist and Baianist movements as well as more orthodox theologians. As with other attacks on Catholic imagery, this had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones. In the Western Church, the pressure to restrain religious imagery resulted in the highly influential decrees of the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563. The Council of Trent decrees confirmed the traditional Catholic doctrine that images only represented the person depicted, and that veneration to them was paid to the person, not the image.[119]
Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the Trinity were condemned. In 1745 Pope Benedict XIV explicitly supported the Throne of Mercy depiction, referring to the "Ancient of Days", but in 1786 it was still necessary for Pope Pius VI to issue a papal bull condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity from churches.[120]
The famous The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo, c.1512
God the Father is symbolized in several Genesis scenes in Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling, most famously The Creation of Adam (whose image of near touching hands of God and Adam is iconic of humanity, being a reminder that Man is created in the Image and Likeness of God (Gen 1:26)).God the Father is depicted as a powerful figure, floating in the clouds in Titian's Assumption of the Virgin in the Frari of Venice, long admired as a masterpiece of High Renaissance art.[121] The Church of the Gesù in Rome includes a number of 16th century depictions of God the Father. In some of these paintings the Trinity is still alluded to in terms of three angels, but Giovanni Battista Fiammeri also depicted God the Father as a man riding on a cloud, above the scenes.[122]
In both the Last Judgment and the Coronation of the Virgin paintings by Rubens he depicted God the Father using the image that by then had become widely accepted, a bearded patriarchal figure above the fray. In the 17th century, the two Spanish artists Velázquez (whose father-in-law Francisco Pacheco was in charge of the approval of new images for the Inquisition) and Murillo both depicted God the Father using a patriarchal figure with a white beard in a purple robe.
The Ancient of Days (1794) Watercolor etching by William Blake
While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and the Low Countries, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe, even during the 17th century. In 1632 most members of the Star Chamber court in England (except the Archbishop of York) condemned the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows, and some considered them illegal.[123] Later in the 17th century Sir Thomas Browne wrote that he considered the representation of God the Father using an old man "a dangerous act" that might lead to Egyptian symbolism.[124] In 1847, Charles Winston was still critical of such images as a "Romish trend" (a term used to refer to Roman Catholics) that he considered best avoided in England.[125]
In 1667 the 43rd chapter of the Great Moscow Council specifically included a ban on a number of symbolic depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list,[126][127] mostly affecting Western-style depictions which had been gaining ground in Orthodox icons. The Council also declared that the person of the Trinity who was the "Ancient of Days" was Christ, as Logos, not God the Father. However some icons continued to be produced in Russia, as well as Greece, Romania, and other Orthodox countries.
Theological approaches
Theologians and philosophers have attributed to God such characteristics as omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, perfect goodness, divine simplicity, and eternal and necessary existence. God has been described as incorporeal, a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the greatest conceivable being existent.[3] These attributes were all claimed to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim scholars, including Maimonides,[53] St Augustine,[53] and Al-Ghazali.[128]
Many philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God,[8] while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.[129]
However, if by its essential nature, free will is not predetermined, then the effect of its will can never be perfectly predicted by anyone, regardless of intelligence and knowledge. Although knowledge of the options presented to that will, combined with perfectly infinite intelligence, could be said to provide God with omniscience if omniscience is defined as knowledge or understanding of all that is.
The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position.[130] Some theists agree that only some of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know."[131] A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.[132]
Many religious believers allow for the existence of other, less powerful spiritual beings such as angels, saints, jinn, demons, and devas.[133][134][135][136][137]
Distribution of belief
Taken on February 2010, Mt. Pulag.
“There are no foreign lands. It is the traveler only who is foreign.” -- Robert Louis Stevenson
Accidental double exposure of my dad, sister, and other trekkers making their way out of the magical grasslands.
A few months ago I read a post about this ancient monument, I was unaware of its existence.
I logged into my Google Maps and recorded it as one of my desired places to visit.
Today Thursday 15th November 2018 Scotland basked in a beautiful Autumn sunshine, my favoured shooting conditions, I packed my Nikon and drove the 25 miles to the site.
Historic Environment Scotland maintain the monument , thankfully they have done a magnificent job, I truly believe it is important to preserve history for the generations to come.
I had a magnificent two hours recording my experience, I never fail to feel overwhelmed by the wealth of history that surrounds Aberdeen and the shire.
Thank's to Historic Environment Scotland for their detailed information on this site.
Ancient Monument - Kinkell Church - Inverurie Aberdeen Scotland.
Kinkell Church, built in the 1200s, is a classic medieval Highland church: simply designed and rectangular in shape. But the liturgical features installed in the 1520s are anything but plain. The stone sacrament house in the north of the church is an especially fine fixture.
Kinkell was refitted for Presbyterian worship following the Protestant Reformation of 1560, and declared redundant in 1771. Much of the building was dismantled and building materials recycled for use in a new kirk.
KINKELL CHURCH
• Kinkell Church, dedicated to St Michael, consist of the remains of a simple rectangular medieval parish church, of which only the N, W and part of the E
wall are upstanding.
The church was partly remodelled, perhaps on more than one occasion,
including in the early 16th century, when an elaborately carved Sacrament
House was built into the E end of the N wall.
Within the church is the monument of Gilbert de Greenlaw, killed at the battle
of Harlaw in 1411; the stone was re-used for a Forbes burial in 1592
CHARACTER OF THE MONUMENT
The church appears to have come on record in the early 13th century. Kinkell
was a mother church, or plebanus, and had dependent chapels at Dyce,
Drumblade, Kemnay, Kinnellar, Kintore and Skene.
This connection, which
was of long standing, may have arisen if Kinkell’s origins was that of an ecclesiastical foundation, rather like a minster, with an extensive parochia.
This would push back its origins considerably.
From the 14th century, certain revenues of the church evidently pertained to the Knights Hospitallers, although it is also recorded as an independent parsonage during the 14th century.
Any connection with the Hospitallers came to an end in 1420, when the church
and its annexes were erected into a prebend of Aberdeen Cathedral.
From a date and a set of initials on the sacrament house, it is apparent that in 1524 Alexander Galloway, rector of Kinkell and canon of Aberdeen Cathedral,
paid for the splendid sacrament house built into the E end of the N wall.
He appears to have been paying for further work the following year as a carved stone panel depicting the crucifixion, dated 1525, and with Alexander’s initials (three times), is built into the N wall (only a bronze replica survives; the original
was removed to Aberdeen Museum in 1934 and subsequently lost).
The church was abandoned in 1771 when the parish was amalgamated with
Keithhall. It was partially demolished to provide building materials for the new
parish church.
Archaeological Overview
There have been no recorded archaeological investigations at Kinkell.
The archaeological potential of the monument is extremely high and any excavation is very like to come across human remains, and perhaps also earlier church
buildings on the site.
Artistic/Architectural Overview
The church is fragmentary and devoid of features apart for the sacrament
house, the crucifixion panel and a single jamb of what must have been a large,
traceried E window. The simple oblong plan of the church suggests that the
basic form of the church dates from the early 13th century, with much late
medieval remodelling.
2/3
• The sacrament house is a particularly fine, and unique, example of this type of
medieval church fixture. It was an aumbry, or wall cupboard, designed to
reserve the host in appropriate reverential surroundings.
• The sacrament house at Kinkell shares several features with others found in
the NE, associated with Galloway, but is unique due to its cross shape. The
aumbry is flanked by two buttresses with crocketed finials. Between these is a
panel, which although badly defaced, appears to have been ornamented with a
monstrance supported by two angels (a very common motif found on other
sacrament houses associated with Alexander Galloway). Above this panel is a
corbelled and battlemented cornice, and above this is an oblong panel, which
probably contained a crucifixion scene, but is now empty. Flanking the
pinnacles are two panels, each filled with scrolls, which are of different forms
although the inscriptions on the scrolls were meant to be read as one and
state: ‘Here is preserved that body which was born of a virgin’.
• The crucifixion panel has a representation of St Michael, the archangel (to
whom the church was dedicated) to the right of the crucified, the Virgin on the
left and under her a priest, perhaps representing Galloway himself as donor,
standing beside an altar on which are Galloway’s initials.
• The sacrament house and the Crucifixion panel appear to have been part of a
liturgical revival in the diocese of Aberdeen during the early decade on the 16th
century. Alexander Galloway appear to have been a central figure in the move
to ensure parish churches had the fittings for the proper worship of God, and in
particular devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. He erected several sacrament
houses in churches he was involved in; Kinkell and its dependents at Dyce and
Kintore, and at King College, Aberdeen and may have been influential in the
decision of his colleagues, Alexander Spittal of Auchindoir and Alexander Lyon
of Turiff, to erect those in their respective churches. Galloway also donated a
font to Kinkell, which now is now in St John’s Episcopal Church, Aberdeen.
• The construction of the sacrament house may have been part of a wider
reorganisation of the chancel area of the church, and it is tempting to suggest
that the great E window may have been a part of this re-organisation, although
details of this moulding may be more consistent with a 14th or 15th century
date.
Social Overview
• The church is currently used as a recreational attraction. It receives little other
community use.
Spiritual Overview
• As a parish church in use for some six centuries, the site has the potential to
inform our understanding of medieval Christianity, the aspirations of the
rectors, vicars and ministers who served the church and the congregations
who worshipped in it.
• The burial ground was in use until fairly recently, and may still be in use for
occasional burials. People still visit family graves and memorials.
Aesthetic Overview
• The church and burial ground are located in the haughs of the River Don,
amongst arable farmland which adds to the appreciation of this monument.
The church has been pointed with a hard cement mortar that give the walls the impression of crazy paving.
The sacrament house, the replica crucifixion panel,
3/3 the window jamb are fine architectural details which are aesthetically very striking, and provide some idea of the glories of this once very fine church.
• The graveslab of Gilbert de Greenlaw, killed at the Battle of Harlaw, which would originally have been a ledger slab, is a particularly detailed carving of an armed knight.
What are the major gaps in understanding of the property?
• Do further historical sources or references survive.
• Nothing is known about the archaeology and earlier history of this site.
The church is an example, although much ruined, of a church which was remodelled in the 16th century.
The sacrament house is a particularly fine example of this type of church
furnishing, and the only example which takes the form of a cross.
Sacrament houses are physical manifestation of an important aspect of late medieval
Christianity; the veneration and adoration of the Body of Christ in the form of the consecrated host.
The church is closely associated with Canon Alexander Galloway, who encouraged a liturgical revival in the diocese in the early 16th century.
The site has high archaeological potential, but as a place of burial over centuries so the scope for research-led invasive excavation is not high.
Associated Properties
St Fergus’, Dyce, Auchindoir Church, St Machars Cathedral, Kintore Church,
In this eBook short (an essay), Poet Tim Kavi celebrates National Poetry Month with the publication of his essay on Walt Whitman: The Embodied Poet of Existence. Basically, the essay is a brief discussion of Whitman juxtaposed with one of his most famous poems,"I Sing the Body Electric." This ebook essay should be of interest to Walt Whitman fans, students, (using it as a resource and Study Guide for Whitman's "I Sing the Body Electric"), and those interested in Tim Kavi's unique contribution as an existentialist thinker.
Published in April 2013, this eBook is currently only available as a Kindle Edition:
Published 2013 by TiLu Press
A bright green patch of moss clings on as the beautifully clear waters of Cameron Falls gush over the top. Despite poor recent rain, this waterfall at Mt Tamborine, Queensland was flowing strongly.
Xochimilco is characterized by the existence of a system of canals, which measure about a total of 170km.These canals, and the small colorful boats that float on them among artificially created land called chinampas are internationally famous. These canals are popular with Mexico City residents as well, especially on Sundays.These canals are all of what is left of what used to be a vast lake and canal system that extended over most parts of the Valley of Mexico, restricting cities such as Tenochtitlan (Mexico City) and Xochimilco to small islands. This system of waterways was the main transportation venue, especially for goods from the pre-Hispanic period until the 20th century. In the pre-Hispanic period, parts of the shallow lakes were filled in, creating canals. Starting in the early colonial period, the interconnected lakes of the valley, including Lake Xochimilco were drained and by the 20th century had shrunk down to a system of canals which still connected Xochimilco with the center of Mexico City. However, with the pumping of underground aquifers since the early 20th century, water tables have dropped, drying canals, and all that are left are the ones in Xochimilco.[17][18] The canals are fed by fresh water springs, which is artificially supplemented by treated water. This because water tables are still dropping and human expansion and filling in of canals is still occurring, threatening to have the last of these canals disappear despite their importance to tourism.
In monotheism, God is conceived of as the Supreme Being and principal object of faith.[3] The concept of God as described by most theologians includes the attributes of omniscience (infinite knowledge), omnipotence (unlimited power), omnipresence (present everywhere), divine simplicity, and as having an eternal and necessary existence. Many theologians also describe God as being omnibenevolent (perfectly good), and all loving.
God is most often held to be non-corporeal,[3] and to be without any human biological sex,[4][5] yet the concept of God actively creating the universe (as opposed to passively)[6] has caused many religions to describe God using masculine terminology, using such terms as "Him" or "Father". Furthermore, some religions (such as Judaism) attribute only a purely grammatical "gender" to God.[7]
In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. In atheism, God is not believed to exist, while God is deemed unknown or unknowable within the context of agnosticism. God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[3] Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God.[8]
There are many names for God, and different names are attached to different cultural ideas about God's identity and attributes. In the ancient Egyptian era of Atenism, possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this deity was called Aten,[9] premised on being the one "true" Supreme Being and Creator of the Universe.[10] In the Hebrew Bible and Judaism, "He Who Is", "I Am that I Am", and the tetragrammaton YHWH (Hebrew: יהוה, which means: "I am who I am"; "He Who Exists") are used as names of God, while Yahweh and Jehovah are sometimes used in Christianity as vocalizations of YHWH. In the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, God, consubstantial in three persons, is called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Judaism, it is common to refer to God by the titular names Elohim or Adonai, the latter of which is believed by some scholars to descend from the Egyptian Aten.[11][12][13][14][15] In Islam, the name Allah, "Al-El", or "Al-Elah" ("the God") is used, while Muslims also have a multitude of titular names for God. In Hinduism, Brahman is often considered a monistic deity.[16] Other religions have names for God, for instance, Baha in the Bahá'í Faith,[17] Waheguru in Sikhism,[18] and Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism.[19]
The many different conceptions of God, and competing claims as to God's characteristics, aims, and actions, have led to the development of ideas of omnitheism, pandeism,[20][21] or a perennial philosophy, which postulates that there is one underlying theological truth, of which all religions express a partial understanding, and as to which "the devout in the various great world religions are in fact worshipping that one God, but through different, overlapping concepts or mental images of Him."[22]
Contents [hide]
1Etymology and usage
2General conceptions
2.1Oneness
2.2Theism, deism and pantheism
2.3Other concepts
3Non-theistic views
3.1Agnosticism and atheism
3.2Anthropomorphism
4Existence
5Specific attributes
5.1Names
5.2Gender
5.3Relationship with creation
6Depiction
6.1Zoroastrianism
6.2Islam
6.3Judaism
6.4Christianity
7Theological approaches
8Distribution of belief
9See also
9.1In specific religions
10References
11Further reading
12External links
Etymology and usage
The Mesha Stele bears the earliest known reference (840 BCE) to the Israelite God Yahweh.
Main article: God (word)
The earliest written form of the Germanic word God (always, in this usage, capitalized[23]) comes from the 6th-century Christian Codex Argenteus. The English word itself is derived from the Proto-Germanic * ǥuđan. The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form * ǵhu-tó-m was likely based on the root * ǵhau(ə)-, which meant either "to call" or "to invoke".[24] The Germanic words for God were originally neuter—applying to both genders—but during the process of the Christianization of the Germanic peoples from their indigenous Germanic paganism, the words became a masculine syntactic form.[25]
The word 'Allah' in Arabic calligraphy
In the English language, the capitalized form of God continues to represent a distinction between monotheistic "God" and "gods" in polytheism.[26][27] The English word God and its counterparts in other languages are normally used for any and all conceptions and, in spite of significant differences between religions, the term remains an English translation common to all. The same holds for Hebrew El, but in Judaism, God is also given a proper name, the tetragrammaton YHWH, in origin possibly the name of an Edomite or Midianite deity, Yahweh. In many translations of the Bible, when the word LORD is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton.[28]
Allāh (Arabic: الله) is the Arabic term with no plural used by Muslims and Arabic speaking Christians and Jews meaning "The God" (with a capital G), while "ʾilāh" (Arabic: إله) is the term used for a deity or a god in general.[29][30][31] God may also be given a proper name in monotheistic currents of Hinduism which emphasize the personal nature of God, with early references to his name as Krishna-Vasudeva in Bhagavata or later Vishnu and Hari.[32]
Ahura Mazda is the name for God used in Zoroastrianism. "Mazda", or rather the Avestan stem-form Mazdā-, nominative Mazdå, reflects Proto-Iranian *Mazdāh (female). It is generally taken to be the proper name of the spirit, and like its Sanskrit cognate medhā, means "intelligence" or "wisdom". Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect Proto-Indo-Iranian *mazdhā-, from Proto-Indo-European mn̩sdʰeh1, literally meaning "placing (dʰeh1) one's mind (*mn̩-s)", hence "wise".[33]
Waheguru (Punjabi: vāhigurū) is a term most often used in Sikhism to refer to God. It means "Wonderful Teacher" in the Punjabi language. Vāhi (a Middle Persian borrowing) means "wonderful" and guru (Sanskrit: guru) is a term denoting "teacher". Waheguru is also described by some as an experience of ecstasy which is beyond all descriptions. The most common usage of the word "Waheguru" is in the greeting Sikhs use with each other:
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh
Wonderful Lord's Khalsa, Victory is to the Wonderful Lord.
Baha, the "greatest" name for God in the Baha'i faith, is Arabic for "All-Glorious".
General conceptions
Main article: Conceptions of God
There is no clear consensus on the nature or even the existence of God.[34] The Abrahamic conceptions of God include the monotheistic definition of God in Judaism, the trinitarian view of Christians, and the Islamic concept of God. The dharmic religions differ in their view of the divine: views of God in Hinduism vary by region, sect, and caste, ranging from monotheistic to polytheistic. Divinity was recognized by the historical Buddha, particularly Śakra and Brahma. However, other sentient beings, including gods, can at best only play a supportive role in one's personal path to salvation. Conceptions of God in the latter developments of the Mahayana tradition give a more prominent place to notions of the divine.[citation needed]
Oneness
Main articles: Monotheism and Henotheism
The Trinity is the belief that God is composed of The Father, The Son (embodied metaphysically in the physical realm by Jesus), and The Holy Spirit.
Monotheists hold that there is only one god, and may claim that the one true god is worshiped in different religions under different names. The view that all theists actually worship the same god, whether they know it or not, is especially emphasized in Hinduism[35] and Sikhism.[36] In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity describes God as one God in three persons. The Trinity comprises The Father, The Son (embodied metaphysically by Jesus), and The Holy Spirit.[37] Islam's most fundamental concept is tawhid (meaning "oneness" or "uniqueness"). God is described in the Quran as: "Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him."[38][39] Muslims repudiate the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, comparing it to polytheism. In Islam, God is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, and are not expected to visualize God.[40]
Henotheism is the belief and worship of a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.[41]
Theism, deism and pantheism
Main articles: Theism, Deism, and Pantheism
Theism generally holds that God exists realistically, objectively, and independently of human thought; that God created and sustains everything; that God is omnipotent and eternal; and that God is personal and interacting with the universe through, for example, religious experience and the prayers of humans.[42] Theism holds that God is both transcendent and immanent; thus, God is simultaneously infinite and in some way present in the affairs of the world.[43] Not all theists subscribe to all of these propositions, but each usually subscribes to some of them (see, by way of comparison, family resemblance).[42] Catholic theology holds that God is infinitely simple and is not involuntarily subject to time. Most theists hold that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, although this belief raises questions about God's responsibility for evil and suffering in the world. Some theists ascribe to God a self-conscious or purposeful limiting of omnipotence, omniscience, or benevolence. Open Theism, by contrast, asserts that, due to the nature of time, God's omniscience does not mean the deity can predict the future. Theism is sometimes used to refer in general to any belief in a god or gods, i.e., monotheism or polytheism.[44][45]
"God blessing the seventh day", a watercolor painting depicting God, by William Blake (1757 – 1827)
Deism holds that God is wholly transcendent: God exists, but does not intervene in the world beyond what was necessary to create it.[43] In this view, God is not anthropomorphic, and neither answers prayers nor produces miracles. Common in Deism is a belief that God has no interest in humanity and may not even be aware of humanity. Pandeism and Panendeism, respectively, combine Deism with the Pantheistic or Panentheistic beliefs.[21][46][47] Pandeism is proposed to explain as to Deism why God would create a universe and then abandon it,[48] and as to Pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.[48][49]
Pantheism holds that God is the universe and the universe is God, whereas Panentheism holds that God contains, but is not identical to, the Universe.[50] It is also the view of the Liberal Catholic Church; Theosophy; some views of Hinduism except Vaishnavism, which believes in panentheism; Sikhism; some divisions of Neopaganism and Taoism, along with many varying denominations and individuals within denominations. Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, paints a pantheistic/panentheistic view of God—which has wide acceptance in Hasidic Judaism, particularly from their founder The Baal Shem Tov—but only as an addition to the Jewish view of a personal god, not in the original pantheistic sense that denies or limits persona to God.[citation needed]
Other concepts
Dystheism, which is related to theodicy, is a form of theism which holds that God is either not wholly good or is fully malevolent as a consequence of the problem of evil. One such example comes from Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, in which Ivan Karamazov rejects God on the grounds that he allows children to suffer.[51]
In modern times, some more abstract concepts have been developed, such as process theology and open theism. The contemporaneous French philosopher Michel Henry has however proposed a phenomenological approach and definition of God as phenomenological essence of Life.[52]
God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[3] These attributes were all supported to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologian philosophers, including Maimonides,[53] Augustine of Hippo,[53] and Al-Ghazali,[8] respectively.
Non-theistic views
See also: Evolutionary origin of religions and Evolutionary psychology of religion
Non-theist views about God also vary. Some non-theists avoid the concept of God, whilst accepting that it is significant to many; other non-theists understand God as a symbol of human values and aspirations. The nineteenth-century English atheist Charles Bradlaugh declared that he refused to say "There is no God", because "the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation";[54] he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian god. Stephen Jay Gould proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called "non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the supernatural, such as those relating to the existence and nature of God, are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.[55]
Another view, advanced by Richard Dawkins, is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that "a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference."[56] Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could disprove the existence of a Creator (not necessarily a God) would be the discovery that the universe is infinitely old.[57]
Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow state in their book, The Grand Design, that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings.[58] Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.[59]
Agnosticism and atheism
Agnosticism is the view that, the truth values of certain claims – especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether God, the divine or the supernatural exist – are unknown and perhaps unknowable.[60][61][62]
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, or a God.[63][64] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[65]
Anthropomorphism
Main article: Anthropomorphism
Pascal Boyer argues that while there is a wide array of supernatural concepts found around the world, in general, supernatural beings tend to behave much like people. The construction of gods and spirits like persons is one of the best known traits of religion. He cites examples from Greek mythology, which is, in his opinion, more like a modern soap opera than other religious systems.[66] Bertrand du Castel and Timothy Jurgensen demonstrate through formalization that Boyer's explanatory model matches physics' epistemology in positing not directly observable entities as intermediaries.[67] Anthropologist Stewart Guthrie contends that people project human features onto non-human aspects of the world because it makes those aspects more familiar. Sigmund Freud also suggested that god concepts are projections of one's father.[68]
Likewise, Émile Durkheim was one of the earliest to suggest that gods represent an extension of human social life to include supernatural beings. In line with this reasoning, psychologist Matt Rossano contends that when humans began living in larger groups, they may have created gods as a means of enforcing morality. In small groups, morality can be enforced by social forces such as gossip or reputation. However, it is much harder to enforce morality using social forces in much larger groups. Rossano indicates that by including ever-watchful gods and spirits, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups.[69]
Existence
Main article: Existence of God
St. Thomas Aquinas summed up five main arguments as proofs for God's existence.
Isaac Newton saw the existence of a Creator necessary in the movement of astronomical objects.
Arguments about the existence of God typically include empirical, deductive, and inductive types. Different views include that: "God does not exist" (strong atheism); "God almost certainly does not exist" (de facto atheism); "no one knows whether God exists" (agnosticism[70]);"God exists, but this cannot be proven or disproven" (de facto theism); and that "God exists and this can be proven" (strong theism).[55]
Countless arguments have been proposed to prove the existence of God.[71] Some of the most notable arguments are the Five Ways of Aquinas, the Argument from Desire proposed by C.S. Lewis, and the Ontological Argument formulated both by St. Anselm and René Descartes.[72]
St. Anselm's approach was to define God as, "that than which nothing greater can be conceived". Famed pantheist philosopher Baruch Spinoza would later carry this idea to its extreme: "By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence." For Spinoza, the whole of the natural universe is made of one substance, God, or its equivalent, Nature.[73] His proof for the existence of God was a variation of the Ontological argument.[74]
Scientist Isaac Newton saw God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.[75] Nevertheless, he rejected polymath Leibniz' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator. In Query 31 of the Opticks, Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention:
For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.[76]
St. Thomas believed that the existence of God is self-evident in itself, but not to us. "Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects."[77] St. Thomas believed that the existence of God can be demonstrated. Briefly in the Summa theologiae and more extensively in the Summa contra Gentiles, he considered in great detail five arguments for the existence of God, widely known as the quinque viae (Five Ways).
For the original text of the five proofs, see quinque viae
Motion: Some things undoubtedly move, though cannot cause their own motion. Since there can be no infinite chain of causes of motion, there must be a First Mover not moved by anything else, and this is what everyone understands by God.
Causation: As in the case of motion, nothing can cause itself, and an infinite chain of causation is impossible, so there must be a First Cause, called God.
Existence of necessary and the unnecessary: Our experience includes things certainly existing but apparently unnecessary. Not everything can be unnecessary, for then once there was nothing and there would still be nothing. Therefore, we are compelled to suppose something that exists necessarily, having this necessity only from itself; in fact itself the cause for other things to exist.
Gradation: If we can notice a gradation in things in the sense that some things are more hot, good, etc., there must be a superlative that is the truest and noblest thing, and so most fully existing. This then, we call God (Note: Thomas does not ascribe actual qualities to God Himself).
Ordered tendencies of nature: A direction of actions to an end is noticed in all bodies following natural laws. Anything without awareness tends to a goal under the guidance of one who is aware. This we call God (Note that even when we guide objects, in Thomas's view, the source of all our knowledge comes from God as well).[78]
Alister McGrath, a formerly atheistic scientist and theologian who has been highly critical of Richard Dawkins' version of atheism
Some theologians, such as the scientist and theologian A.E. McGrath, argue that the existence of God is not a question that can be answered using the scientific method.[79][80] Agnostic Stephen Jay Gould argues that science and religion are not in conflict and do not overlap.[81]
Some findings in the fields of cosmology, evolutionary biology and neuroscience are interpreted by some atheists (including Lawrence M. Krauss and Sam Harris) as evidence that God is an imaginary entity only, with no basis in reality.[82][83][84] These atheists claim that a single, omniscient God who is imagined to have created the universe and is particularly attentive to the lives of humans has been imagined, embellished and promulgated in a trans-generational manner.[85] Richard Dawkins interprets such findings not only as a lack of evidence for the material existence of such a God, but as extensive evidence to the contrary.[55] However, his views are opposed by some theologians and scientists including Alister McGrath, who argues that existence of God is compatible with science.[86]
Neuroscientist Michael Nikoletseas has proposed that questions of the existence of God are no different from questions of natural sciences. Following a biological comparative approach, he concludes that it is highly probable that God exists, and, although not visible, it is possible that we know some of his attributes.[59]
Specific attributes
Different religious traditions assign differing (though often similar) attributes and characteristics to God, including expansive powers and abilities, psychological characteristics, gender characteristics, and preferred nomenclature. The assignment of these attributes often differs according to the conceptions of God in the culture from which they arise. For example, attributes of God in Christianity, attributes of God in Islam, and the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy in Judaism share certain similarities arising from their common roots.
Names
Main article: Names of God
99 names of Allah, in Chinese Sini (script)
The word God is "one of the most complex and difficult in the English language." In the Judeo-Christian tradition, "the Bible has been the principal source of the conceptions of God". That the Bible "includes many different images, concepts, and ways of thinking about" God has resulted in perpetual "disagreements about how God is to be conceived and understood".[87]
Throughout the Hebrew and Christian Bibles there are many names for God. One of them is Elohim. Another one is El Shaddai, meaning "God Almighty".[88] A third notable name is El Elyon, which means "The Most High God".[89]
God is described and referred in the Quran and hadith by certain names or attributes, the most common being Al-Rahman, meaning "Most Compassionate" and Al-Rahim, meaning "Most Merciful" (See Names of God in Islam).[90]
Supreme soul
The Brahma Kumaris use the term "Supreme Soul" to refer to God. They see God as incorporeal and eternal, and regard him as a point of living light like human souls, but without a physical body, as he does not enter the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. God is seen as the perfect and constant embodiment of all virtues, powers and values and that He is the unconditionally loving Father of all souls, irrespective of their religion, gender, or culture.[91]
Vaishnavism, a tradition in Hinduism, has list of titles and names of Krishna.
Gender
Main article: Gender of God
The gender of God may be viewed as either a literal or an allegorical aspect of a deity who, in classical western philosophy, transcends bodily form.[92][93] Polytheistic religions commonly attribute to each of the gods a gender, allowing each to interact with any of the others, and perhaps with humans, sexually. In most monotheistic religions, God has no counterpart with which to relate sexually. Thus, in classical western philosophy the gender of this one-and-only deity is most likely to be an analogical statement of how humans and God address, and relate to, each other. Namely, God is seen as begetter of the world and revelation which corresponds to the active (as opposed to the receptive) role in sexual intercourse.[6]
Biblical sources usually refer to God using male words, except Genesis 1:26-27,[94][95] Psalm 123:2-3, and Luke 15:8-10 (female); Hosea 11:3-4, Deuteronomy 32:18, Isaiah 66:13, Isaiah 49:15, Isaiah 42:14, Psalm 131:2 (a mother); Deuteronomy 32:11-12 (a mother eagle); and Matthew 23:37 and Luke 13:34 (a mother hen).
Relationship with creation
See also: Creator deity, Prayer, and Worship
And Elohim Created Adam by William Blake, c.1795
Prayer plays a significant role among many believers. Muslims believe that the purpose of existence is to worship God.[96][97] He is viewed as a personal God and there are no intermediaries, such as clergy, to contact God. Prayer often also includes supplication and asking forgiveness. God is often believed to be forgiving. For example, a hadith states God would replace a sinless people with one who sinned but still asked repentance.[98] Christian theologian Alister McGrath writes that there are good reasons to suggest that a "personal god" is integral to the Christian outlook, but that one has to understand it is an analogy. "To say that God is like a person is to affirm the divine ability and willingness to relate to others. This does not imply that God is human, or located at a specific point in the universe."[99]
Adherents of different religions generally disagree as to how to best worship God and what is God's plan for mankind, if there is one. There are different approaches to reconciling the contradictory claims of monotheistic religions. One view is taken by exclusivists, who believe they are the chosen people or have exclusive access to absolute truth, generally through revelation or encounter with the Divine, which adherents of other religions do not. Another view is religious pluralism. A pluralist typically believes that his religion is the right one, but does not deny the partial truth of other religions. An example of a pluralist view in Christianity is supersessionism, i.e., the belief that one's religion is the fulfillment of previous religions. A third approach is relativistic inclusivism, where everybody is seen as equally right; an example being universalism: the doctrine that salvation is eventually available for everyone. A fourth approach is syncretism, mixing different elements from different religions. An example of syncretism is the New Age movement.
Jews and Christians believe that humans are created in the likeness of God, and are the center, crown and key to God's creation, stewards for God, supreme over everything else God had made (Gen 1:26); for this reason, humans are in Christianity called the "Children of God".[100]
Depiction
God is defined as incorporeal,[3] and invisible from direct sight, and thus cannot be portrayed in a literal visual image.
The respective principles of religions may or may not permit them to use images (which are entirely symbolic) to represent God in art or in worship .
Zoroastrianism
Ahura Mazda (depiction is on the right, with high crown) presents Ardashir I (left) with the ring of kingship. (Relief at Naqsh-e Rustam, 3rd century CE)
During the early Parthian Empire, Ahura Mazda was visually represented for worship. This practice ended during the beginning of the Sassanid empire. Zoroastrian iconoclasm, which can be traced to the end of the Parthian period and the beginning of the Sassanid, eventually put an end to the use of all images of Ahura Mazda in worship. However, Ahura Mazda continued to be symbolized by a dignified male figure, standing or on horseback which is found in Sassanian investiture.[101]
Islam
Further information: God in Islam
Muslims believe that God (Allah) is beyond all comprehension or equal and does not resemble any of His creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, are not expected to visualize God.[40]
Judaism
At least some Jews do not use any image for God, since God is the unimageable Being who cannot be represented in material forms.[102] In some samples of Jewish Art, however, sometimes God, or at least His Intervention, is indicated by a Hand Of God symbol, which represents the bath Kol (literally "daughter of a voice") or Voice of God;[103] this use of the Hand Of God is carried over to Christian Art.
Christianity
This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (April 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Early Christians believed that the words of the Gospel of John 1:18: "No man has seen God at any time" and numerous other statements were meant to apply not only to God, but to all attempts at the depiction of God.[104]
Use of the symbolic Hand of God in the Ascension from the Drogo Sacramentary, c. 850
However, later on the Hand of God symbol is found several times in the only ancient synagogue with a large surviving decorative scheme, the Dura Europos Synagogue of the mid-3rd century, and was probably adopted into Early Christian art from Jewish art. It was common in Late Antique art in both East and West, and remained the main way of symbolizing the actions or approval of God the Father in the West until about the end of the Romanesque period. It also represents the bath Kol (literally "daughter of a voice") or voice of God,[103] just like in Jewish Art.
In situations, such as the Baptism of Christ, where a specific representation of God the Father was indicated, the Hand of God was used, with increasing freedom from the Carolingian period until the end of the Romanesque. This motif now, since the discovery of the 3rd century Dura Europos synagogue, seems to have been borrowed from Jewish art, and is found in Christian art almost from its beginnings.
The use of religious images in general continued to increase up to the end of the 7th century, to the point that in 695, upon assuming the throne, Byzantine emperor Justinian II put an image of Christ on the obverse side of his gold coins, resulting in a rift which ended the use of Byzantine coin types in the Islamic world.[105] However, the increase in religious imagery did not include depictions of God the Father. For instance, while the eighty second canon of the Council of Trullo in 692 did not specifically condemn images of The Father, it suggested that icons of Christ were preferred over Old Testament shadows and figures.[106]
The beginning of the 8th century witnessed the suppression and destruction of religious icons as the period of Byzantine iconoclasm (literally image-breaking) started. Emperor Leo III (717–741), suppressed the use of icons by imperial edict of the Byzantine Empire, presumably due to a military loss which he attributed to the undue veneration of icons.[107] The edict (which was issued without consulting the Church) forbade the veneration of religious images but did not apply to other forms of art, including the image of the emperor, or religious symbols such as the cross.[108] Theological arguments against icons then began to appear with iconoclasts arguing that icons could not represent both the divine and the human natures of Jesus at the same time. In this atmosphere, no public depictions of God the Father were even attempted and such depictions only began to appear two centuries later.
The Second Council of Nicaea in 787 effectively ended the first period of Byzantine iconoclasm and restored the honouring of icons and holy images in general.[109] However, this did not immediately translate into large scale depictions of God the Father. Even supporters of the use of icons in the 8th century, such as Saint John of Damascus, drew a distinction between images of God the Father and those of Christ.
In his treatise On the Divine Images John of Damascus wrote: "In former times, God who is without form or body, could never be depicted. But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see".[110] The implication here is that insofar as God the Father or the Spirit did not become man, visible and tangible, images and portrait icons can not be depicted. So what was true for the whole Trinity before Christ remains true for the Father and the Spirit but not for the Word. John of Damascus wrote:[111]
"If we attempt to make an image of the invisible God, this would be sinful indeed. It is impossible to portray one who is without body:invisible, uncircumscribed and without form."
Around 790 Charlemagne ordered a set of four books that became known as the Libri Carolini (i.e. "Charles' books") to refute what his court mistakenly understood to be the iconoclast decrees of the Byzantine Second Council of Nicaea regarding sacred images. Although not well known during the Middle Ages, these books describe the key elements of the Catholic theological position on sacred images. To the Western Church, images were just objects made by craftsmen, to be utilized for stimulating the senses of the faithful, and to be respected for the sake of the subject represented, not in themselves. The Council of Constantinople (869) (considered ecumenical by the Western Church, but not the Eastern Church) reaffirmed the decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea and helped stamp out any remaining coals of iconoclasm. Specifically, its third canon required the image of Christ to have veneration equal with that of a Gospel book:[112]
We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator and Savior of all people, must be venerated with the same honor as is given the book of the holy Gospels. For as through the language of the words contained in this book all can reach salvation, so, due to the action which these images exercise by their colors, all wise and simple alike, can derive profit from them.
But images of God the Father were not directly addressed in Constantinople in 869. A list of permitted icons was enumerated at this Council, but symbols of God the Father were not among them.[113] However, the general acceptance of icons and holy images began to create an atmosphere in which God the Father could be symbolized.
Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to use a human to symbolize God the Father in Western art.[104] Yet, Western art eventually required some way to illustrate the presence of the Father, so through successive representations a set of artistic styles for symbolizing the Father using a man gradually emerged around the 10th century AD. A rationale for the use of a human is the belief that God created the soul of Man in the image of His own (thus allowing Human to transcend the other animals).
It appears that when early artists designed to represent God the Father, fear and awe restrained them from a usage of the whole human figure. Typically only a small part would be used as the image, usually the hand, or sometimes the face, but rarely a whole human. In many images, the figure of the Son supplants the Father, so a smaller portion of the person of the Father is depicted.[114]
By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French illuminated manuscripts, which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in stained glass church windows in England. Initially the head or bust was usually shown in some form of frame of clouds in the top of the picture space, where the Hand of God had formerly appeared; the Baptism of Christ on the famous baptismal font in Liège of Rainer of Huy is an example from 1118 (a Hand of God is used in another scene). Gradually the amount of the human symbol shown can increase to a half-length figure, then a full-length, usually enthroned, as in Giotto's fresco of c. 1305 in Padua.[115] In the 14th century the Naples Bible carried a depiction of God the Father in the Burning bush. By the early 15th century, the Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry has a considerable number of symbols, including an elderly but tall and elegant full-length figure walking in the Garden of Eden, which show a considerable diversity of apparent ages and dress. The "Gates of Paradise" of the Florence Baptistry by Lorenzo Ghiberti, begun in 1425 use a similar tall full-length symbol for the Father. The Rohan Book of Hours of about 1430 also included depictions of God the Father in half-length human form, which were now becoming standard, and the Hand of God becoming rarer. At the same period other works, like the large Genesis altarpiece by the Hamburg painter Meister Bertram, continued to use the old depiction of Christ as Logos in Genesis scenes. In the 15th century there was a brief fashion for depicting all three persons of the Trinity as similar or identical figures with the usual appearance of Christ.
In an early Venetian school Coronation of the Virgin by Giovanni d'Alemagna and Antonio Vivarini, (c. 1443) The Father is depicted using the symbol consistently used by other artists later, namely a patriarch, with benign, yet powerful countenance and with long white hair and a beard, a depiction largely derived from, and justified by, the near-physical, but still figurative, description of the Ancient of Days.[116]
. ...the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. (Daniel 7:9)
Usage of two Hands of God"(relatively unusual) and the Holy Spirit as a dove in Baptism of Christ, by Verrocchio, 1472
In the Annunciation by Benvenuto di Giovanni in 1470, God the Father is portrayed in the red robe and a hat that resembles that of a Cardinal. However, even in the later part of the 15th century, the symbolic representation of the Father and the Holy Spirit as "hands and dove" continued, e.g. in Verrocchio's Baptism of Christ in 1472.[117]
God the Father with His Right Hand Raised in Blessing, with a triangular halo representing the Trinity, Girolamo dai Libri c. 1555
In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father using an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo (as a reference to the Trinity), or with a papal crown, specially in Northern Renaissance painting. In these depictions The Father may hold a globe or book (to symbolize God's knowledge and as a reference to how knowledge is deemed divine). He is behind and above Christ on the Cross in the Throne of Mercy iconography. A dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit may hover above. Various people from different classes of society, e.g. kings, popes or martyrs may be present in the picture. In a Trinitarian Pietà, God the Father is often symbolized using a man wearing a papal dress and a papal crown, supporting the dead Christ in his arms. They are depicted as floating in heaven with angels who carry the instruments of the Passion.[118]
Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the Jansenist and Baianist movements as well as more orthodox theologians. As with other attacks on Catholic imagery, this had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones. In the Western Church, the pressure to restrain religious imagery resulted in the highly influential decrees of the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563. The Council of Trent decrees confirmed the traditional Catholic doctrine that images only represented the person depicted, and that veneration to them was paid to the person, not the image.[119]
Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the Trinity were condemned. In 1745 Pope Benedict XIV explicitly supported the Throne of Mercy depiction, referring to the "Ancient of Days", but in 1786 it was still necessary for Pope Pius VI to issue a papal bull condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity from churches.[120]
The famous The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo, c.1512
God the Father is symbolized in several Genesis scenes in Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling, most famously The Creation of Adam (whose image of near touching hands of God and Adam is iconic of humanity, being a reminder that Man is created in the Image and Likeness of God (Gen 1:26)).God the Father is depicted as a powerful figure, floating in the clouds in Titian's Assumption of the Virgin in the Frari of Venice, long admired as a masterpiece of High Renaissance art.[121] The Church of the Gesù in Rome includes a number of 16th century depictions of God the Father. In some of these paintings the Trinity is still alluded to in terms of three angels, but Giovanni Battista Fiammeri also depicted God the Father as a man riding on a cloud, above the scenes.[122]
In both the Last Judgment and the Coronation of the Virgin paintings by Rubens he depicted God the Father using the image that by then had become widely accepted, a bearded patriarchal figure above the fray. In the 17th century, the two Spanish artists Velázquez (whose father-in-law Francisco Pacheco was in charge of the approval of new images for the Inquisition) and Murillo both depicted God the Father using a patriarchal figure with a white beard in a purple robe.
The Ancient of Days (1794) Watercolor etching by William Blake
While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and the Low Countries, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe, even during the 17th century. In 1632 most members of the Star Chamber court in England (except the Archbishop of York) condemned the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows, and some considered them illegal.[123] Later in the 17th century Sir Thomas Browne wrote that he considered the representation of God the Father using an old man "a dangerous act" that might lead to Egyptian symbolism.[124] In 1847, Charles Winston was still critical of such images as a "Romish trend" (a term used to refer to Roman Catholics) that he considered best avoided in England.[125]
In 1667 the 43rd chapter of the Great Moscow Council specifically included a ban on a number of symbolic depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list,[126][127] mostly affecting Western-style depictions which had been gaining ground in Orthodox icons. The Council also declared that the person of the Trinity who was the "Ancient of Days" was Christ, as Logos, not God the Father. However some icons continued to be produced in Russia, as well as Greece, Romania, and other Orthodox countries.
Theological approaches
Theologians and philosophers have attributed to God such characteristics as omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, perfect goodness, divine simplicity, and eternal and necessary existence. God has been described as incorporeal, a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the greatest conceivable being existent.[3] These attributes were all claimed to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim scholars, including Maimonides,[53] St Augustine,[53] and Al-Ghazali.[128]
Many philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God,[8] while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.[129]
However, if by its essential nature, free will is not predetermined, then the effect of its will can never be perfectly predicted by anyone, regardless of intelligence and knowledge. Although knowledge of the options presented to that will, combined with perfectly infinite intelligence, could be said to provide God with omniscience if omniscience is defined as knowledge or understanding of all that is.
The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position.[130] Some theists agree that only some of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know."[131] A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.[132]
Many religious believers allow for the existence of other, less powerful spiritual beings such as angels, saints, jinn, demons, and devas.[133][134][135][136][137]
Distribution of belief
Arthur Garfield Dove (1880-1946) - "Me and the Moon" (1937)
Au-dela des Etoiles - Le Paysage Mystique de Monet a Kandinsky
"Seeking an order beyond physical appearances, going beyond physical realities to come closer to the mysteries of existence, experimenting with the suppression of the self in an indissoluble union with the cosmos… It was the mystical experience above all else that inspired the Symbolist artists of the late 19th century who, reacting against the cult of science and naturalism, chose to evoke emotion and mystery. The landscape, therefore, seemed to these artists to offer the best setting for their quest, the perfect place for contemplation and the expression of inner feelings.
Thus the exhibition, organised in partnership with the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto, explores the genre of landscape principally through the works of Paul Gauguin, Maurice Denis, Ferdinand Hodler and Vincent Van Gogh, but also presents North American painters such as Giorgia O'Keeffe and Emily Carr, who are less well known in France. Contemplation, the ordeal of the night or of war, the fusion of the individual with the cosmos, and the experience of the transcendental forces of nature, are stages in a mystical journey the exhibition invites you to take."
Landscape received scant mention in Symbolist circles although the Impressionists had embraced it as a subject and invented a new style of painting focusing on the tangible world.
However, some artists chose to address their spiritual inquiries by depicting landscapes.
Against the backdrop of the rise of Positivism, which prioritised scientific experimentation, and in a world experiencing significant change, artists were pervaded by a form of idealism and began to question their own origins, religious culture and the relationship between man and nature. Nature became the locus for soul-searching, culminating in mystical experiences.
Mysticism was widespread in the late 19th century and this phenomenon is a feature of all religions and beliefs, offering a means of accessing the mysteries of existence through oneness with nature. This exhibition aims to analyse how mysticism influenced landscape painting at the dawn of the 20th century, paving the way for the birth of abstraction.
The sections of the exhibition reveal works by artists from diverse cultures who are exploring the transcendence and immanence of nature. The first section, which is underpinned by Monet’s aesthetic experiments, introduces visitors to the work of art as an aid to contemplation.
However, many artists use the motif of the landscape as a starting point to express their aspiration to mystical experience, including the Nabis, who found the theme of the sacred wood conducive to meditation. The second section explores the notion of the divine in nature in greater depth through works belonging to the Synthesist, Symbolist and Divisionist movements. Their iconography draws on Christian and Pantheist tropes.
In the third section, vivid and original paintings by Canadian artists from the period 1910-1930 tell the story of the North in pictures influenced by the natural world of Scandinavia. Landscape also reflects actual or internalised night in the fourth section, which is luminous in the case of Van Gogh, or melancholic and tragic when evil makes its presence felt.
By contrast, the mystical painter Dulac paves the way for the universal. The final section addresses the forces which transcend man and draw him to the realm of the stars: the cosmos and its interstellar light. This visit aims to reflect what Kandinsky describes as “those seeking for the internal in the external”.
www.musee-orsay.fr/en/events/exhibitions/in-the-musee-dor...
...
Cordoba. What's in a name? Human settlement here seems to have always had a variation of this name.
The first recorded existence of a settlement here (though Neanderthal existence was confirmed in the area between 42,000-35,000 B.C. and preurban settlements dating from the 8th century B.C.)...was with the Carthaginians.
General Hamilcar Barca (Hannibal's dad) renamed it Kartuba (previously called Kart-Juba, which meant "City of Juba.").
The Romans, after winning the Punic Wars, took over Iberia (in 206 B.C.) and dramatically changed the name of this town to...Corduba. With the Romans, you can start to find plenty of things in town. The Roman Bridge still stands. The Roman city wall still stands (base is Roman and changes with subsequent civilizations as you go up...Moorish, Christian.) If you tour the Alcazar, you'll see a handful of nice Roman mosaics on display. Then there's the Roman temple and ruins there.
Well, those Romans didn't last forever. After about 5-6 centuries of glory, they faded into history books, being overtaken in bits and pieces by northern European groups. For Cordoba's purposes...the Visigoths. The Visigoths were Christians, not some backwoods group. They built a church (St. Vincent Church) on the site of what is now the Mezquita-Cathedral in the heart of Cordoba. The Visigoths, though, weren't as strong as the Romans and squabbled a bit. Civil wars made their presence here fairly short-lived (just over 100 years) until the next dominant folks came calling.
The Moors decided to pay the town a visit in 711. They liked it so much that they took it over by force and stayed...for about 500 years.
At first, it was a subordinate town to the Damascus Caliphate. And the Moors, too, changed the name of the city to something really different: Qurtuba.
Apparently tiring of reporting to Damascus, the locals decided they'd just run things themselves beginning in 766 A.D. by naming this the Umayyad Emirate (eventually Caliphate).
Things went well for the Moors in Spain (which is why they ran the Good Ship Iberia for 7 centuries or so.) While Christian Europe tends to call these the Dark Ages, they were anything but here in Iberia.
By global standards of those times, Cordoba was massive. Its population ~800 A.D. was about 200,000. That was 0.1% of the global population. (That would put it on par with a city of 7 million today, which is...Hong Kong or Ho Chi Minh City/Saigon. Basically...massive.) At the height of the Caliphate (~1,000 A.D.), the population had doubled to about 400,000.
And why did so many folks live in good ol' Cordoba? Well, during the 10th-11th centuries, Cordoba was one of the greatest cultural, political, financial, and economic centers of the world.
Christians and Jews coexisted fairly well with the Moors (well...it's all relative, I suppose). Take the Jewish quarter, for example.
The Jews all lived on three fairly small narrow streets near the Great Mosque (which was built on the ruins of St. Vincent Church during this time). They were allowed to go out and work in town by day, but they had a curfew and were all locked in the neighborhood by night. Not sure how I'd like that.
One of the most important Jewish scholars, Maimonides, was born here in Cordoba (in the 1130s; 1135, or 1138). This was the end of what folks would call the Golden Age of Judaism on the peninsula. (Bad things -- or worse things -- were in store for the Sefarad.)
Maimonides bolted at a fairly young age and spent the majority of his life in northern Africa (Morocco, Egypt.) He was a rabbinical scholar, astronomer, physician, and philosopher. He was basically a Renaissance Man...before the Renaissance.
Like the end of the Golden Age of Jewish culture in the Iberian Peninsula, the Moors reign was slowly being chipped away by Christian Spain. (Almost immediately upon taking over 90% of the Iberian Peninsula in 711, the Christians fought back, little by little, to reconquer their land.)
With the death of al-Mansur, after an expedition up north to La Rioja, in 1002, the caliphate slowly started to disintegrate. It had everything except a strong ruler. Even with that, it took the Christians quite some time to reconquer Cordoba.
King Fernando III of Spain took the city after a few months' siege in 1236. Cordoba lost its position as the most important city -- Sevilla was the new capital of Andalusia -- and Cordoba's position in the world faded during the Renaissance. (I guess you could say Cordoba had an anti-Renaissance?) The population dwindled to 20,000 in the 17th century.
What you have in town now are the remains of history, surrounded by generic modernity. (Directly across the way from the Door of Forgiveness to the Great Mosque? Burger King. How's that for progress?)
I'll write specific pieces on the Mezquita (which demands its own space) and also on the flowered patios for which modern Cordoba is famous in other posts.
Balloons are actually the oldest aerial weapon in existence. Only a decade after the French Montgolfier brothers successfully began testing hot air balloons in 1782, they were used in the French Revolutionary Wars as observation devices, to better see enemy movements. Though 1794 was the first time balloons were ever used in combat, during the American Revolution Benjamin Franklin had proposed using them to carry infantry across the English Channel, and somehow rig them to fire cannon--an early version of paratrooper assault and the gunship concept.
Military ballooning in the United States began with Thaddeus Lowe and his successful use of balloons to keep track of Confederate troop movements during the Seven Days campaign of 1862. The Confederates regarded balloons to be enough of a threat that they fired artillery at Lowe's balloon and instituted blackouts to keep Lowe from counting campfires at night. The British would learn from the American experience and use balloons during the Boer Wars.
By World War I, balloons were even more important, despite the development of rigid, powered dirigibles and aircraft. Artillery had developed to the point that it could now strike targets over the horizon, and balloons were needed to correct and guide fire; with the development of the wireless radio, balloons could quickly adjust artillery strikes. As such, balloons became important targets for the enemy, and both the Allies and the Central Powers were careful to surround their balloons with antiaircraft guns and occasionally fighter patrols. "Balloon-busting" became a hallmark of several Allied aces, but it was not as easy as it looked. Because of the increasing lethality of fighter aircraft, observation balloons fell out of favor before World War II, though they were still occasionally used in low-threat areas.
Just after the outbreak of World War I, French engineer Albert Caquot--who before the war was best known for designing bridges and the immense Christ of Corcovado statue in Brazil--designed a new, more aerodynamic balloon type. He noticed that the prewar French balloons could not be used in high winds, so he rearranged the internal gas bags to give his design better stability. When the Caquot Type R was first tested in 1914, it was found to be stable in winds in excess of 50 mph. Its crew of two would usually be flown at 4000 feet; they had extensive maps and an onboard radio. If the crew got into trouble, they could bail out--balloon crews were the first airmen to be issued parachutes.
The Type R was hugely successful, and thousands were built by all the Allied nations. Nearly all that survived the war were dismantled after the war, but the British put the Caquot back in production during World War II; these were rarely if ever used for their intended purpose, but made for good training devices, and formed the basis for unmanned barrage balloons used to bring down unwary, low-flying aircraft.
Once more, nearly all Type Rs were destroyed at the end of World War II, but the British Air Ministry saved a single example, which was used for training until 1960. Surprisingly, it was not broken up, but placed in storage and forgotten. In 1975, an Anglo-American search team found this Type R, and it was presented as a gift to the National Museum of the USAF. Goodyear Aerospace restored it, and it was placed on display in 1979--the only known example of an original Caquot balloon left in the world. Most balloons were painted drab colors to camouflage them against the ground, and this one carries an early US Army Air Service roundel.
On December 9, 2019, students learned about how diversity is perceived in Morocco and Egypt and what ordinary people do to celebrate difference. Together they learned that diversity is an aspect of human existence and got to examine cultural items from both countries.
I was experimenting here with trying to combine two images to make is appear as if this is an ordinary room...but when you take a closer look not everything quite matches up.
"It is clear and evident, therefore, that the first bestowal of God is the Word, and its discoverer and recipient is the power of understanding. This Word is the foremost instructor in the school of existence and the revealer of Him Who is the Almighty. All that is seen is visible only through the light of its wisdom. All that is manifest is but a token of its knowledge. All names are but its name, and the beginning and end of all matters must needs depend upon it."
Bahá’u’lláh
It is what man chooses to do or not do with these words that needs to be the conversation...
This gothique castle had a pretty short existence, built at the end of the 13th Century, it was owned by honrable lords and bandits alike, and the last owner brought it in conflict with the king George of Poděbrady, and the royal army seized and demolished the castle in 1467. Still many remains can be found, the area is well accessible, many path lead around ruined palaces and towers, and the top presents a beautiful look into the landscape. The tower above the river and the earth wall beside it were built later as a base for mobile guns. The northern palace in the core is the best preserved building. In the woods the gate with a base for the falling bridge is still existent.
Handheld shot at 200mm focal length using a Nikon 18-200mm VR lens.
Much better if viewed at the larger sizes so you can see the crisp detail....
Description: FOR THE RECORD: >I first pondered about the existence of these aliens in 1975, when I noticed that some of my personal items were being stolen or moved around, and because there were constantly sounds that go “bump in the night.” So from 1975 to 1977, I sought to see or capture one. I failed, but what I figured out was that they cloak, that they had the ability to make themselves invisible to the naked human eye. Having no proof of their existence I prudently kept my suspicions to myself and from 1977 to 2004, I held them in the back of my mind, and only remembered them occasionally as things would go missing or because there were sounds of “bumps in the night”, but I took no further actions until 2004. Since 2004, I have fervently sought to befriend them and make physical contact. So far I have been unsuccessful in making physical contact, but I have gained some of their confidence. Now, they freely make noise around me,
touch me, whistle aloud to me, but I see nothing; and I still do not know where they live or come from. I wish my identity to remain a secret until contact is made because if I were to have an invasion of peoples looking for these guys, they the Aerostockians would leave never to return having felt betrayed by me. We would be the big losers, not them.
>I reason that they come in all thin body sizes and their heights are from one-eight of an (1/8”) inch to three (3’) feet and the majority of them are white in colour. They love to play games and they and extremely dangerous. No longer, but in the past they have slipped me poisoned twice, hit me hard in my head, awakening me from my sleep, placed razor blades in my path, scratched me leaving welts, caved in a section of my roof, raid my garbage and refrigerator etc., the remaining details are in my book. I have emptied my bank account spending thousands of dollars involving experiments concerning things they might want or need. They do respond favourably, by leaving in place those things that they like and tossing away those things that they don’t like. In their arrogance, they will steal food but you can not offer them food and have them to except it.
>It is far too early to speculate, however if they have advanced technology of military application and it falls into my hands, I will inform the US-Office of Science and Technology Policy. All in all, I think physical contact will be made because I believe this whole adventure is about bringing the Gospel of Christ to aliens (Matt. 24:14) and who knows maybe they have some solutions to our problems of Global Warming.
>Take time to download the photos because you will see for your own eyes that these tiny one (1) inch tall beings do exist. Have your expert examine the photos and I am sure the verdict will return “unhampered with – scene is authentic.” As I stated in the description of Real Illusions #7 – the Silvery aluminium area is exactly 8”long X 1 ½”height X 4width”; in other words all the changing faces you see are approximately one-half (1/2”) inches in height. To maintain my balance, I simply look at super tiny flying insects, and then I know this is all possible and real. As different as they might be, these yet are highly intelligent living beings; so who was it that said that God does not exist.
A few months ago I read a post about this ancient monument, I was unaware of its existence.
I logged into my Google Maps and recorded it as one of my desired places to visit.
Today Thursday 15th November 2018 Scotland basked in a beautiful Autumn sunshine, my favoured shooting conditions, I packed my Nikon and drove the 25 miles to the site.
Historic Environment Scotland maintain the monument , thankfully they have done a magnificent job, I truly believe it is important to preserve history for the generations to come.
I had a magnificent two hours recording my experience, I never fail to feel overwhelmed by the wealth of history that surrounds Aberdeen and the shire.
Thank's to Historic Environment Scotland for their detailed information on this site.
Ancient Monument - Kinkell Church - Inverurie Aberdeen Scotland.
Kinkell Church, built in the 1200s, is a classic medieval Highland church: simply designed and rectangular in shape. But the liturgical features installed in the 1520s are anything but plain. The stone sacrament house in the north of the church is an especially fine fixture.
Kinkell was refitted for Presbyterian worship following the Protestant Reformation of 1560, and declared redundant in 1771. Much of the building was dismantled and building materials recycled for use in a new kirk.
KINKELL CHURCH
• Kinkell Church, dedicated to St Michael, consist of the remains of a simple rectangular medieval parish church, of which only the N, W and part of the E
wall are upstanding.
The church was partly remodelled, perhaps on more than one occasion,
including in the early 16th century, when an elaborately carved Sacrament
House was built into the E end of the N wall.
Within the church is the monument of Gilbert de Greenlaw, killed at the battle
of Harlaw in 1411; the stone was re-used for a Forbes burial in 1592
CHARACTER OF THE MONUMENT
The church appears to have come on record in the early 13th century. Kinkell
was a mother church, or plebanus, and had dependent chapels at Dyce,
Drumblade, Kemnay, Kinnellar, Kintore and Skene.
This connection, which
was of long standing, may have arisen if Kinkell’s origins was that of an ecclesiastical foundation, rather like a minster, with an extensive parochia.
This would push back its origins considerably.
From the 14th century, certain revenues of the church evidently pertained to the Knights Hospitallers, although it is also recorded as an independent parsonage during the 14th century.
Any connection with the Hospitallers came to an end in 1420, when the church
and its annexes were erected into a prebend of Aberdeen Cathedral.
From a date and a set of initials on the sacrament house, it is apparent that in 1524 Alexander Galloway, rector of Kinkell and canon of Aberdeen Cathedral,
paid for the splendid sacrament house built into the E end of the N wall.
He appears to have been paying for further work the following year as a carved stone panel depicting the crucifixion, dated 1525, and with Alexander’s initials (three times), is built into the N wall (only a bronze replica survives; the original
was removed to Aberdeen Museum in 1934 and subsequently lost).
The church was abandoned in 1771 when the parish was amalgamated with
Keithhall. It was partially demolished to provide building materials for the new
parish church.
Archaeological Overview
There have been no recorded archaeological investigations at Kinkell.
The archaeological potential of the monument is extremely high and any excavation is very like to come across human remains, and perhaps also earlier church
buildings on the site.
Artistic/Architectural Overview
The church is fragmentary and devoid of features apart for the sacrament
house, the crucifixion panel and a single jamb of what must have been a large,
traceried E window. The simple oblong plan of the church suggests that the
basic form of the church dates from the early 13th century, with much late
medieval remodelling.
2/3
• The sacrament house is a particularly fine, and unique, example of this type of
medieval church fixture. It was an aumbry, or wall cupboard, designed to
reserve the host in appropriate reverential surroundings.
• The sacrament house at Kinkell shares several features with others found in
the NE, associated with Galloway, but is unique due to its cross shape. The
aumbry is flanked by two buttresses with crocketed finials. Between these is a
panel, which although badly defaced, appears to have been ornamented with a
monstrance supported by two angels (a very common motif found on other
sacrament houses associated with Alexander Galloway). Above this panel is a
corbelled and battlemented cornice, and above this is an oblong panel, which
probably contained a crucifixion scene, but is now empty. Flanking the
pinnacles are two panels, each filled with scrolls, which are of different forms
although the inscriptions on the scrolls were meant to be read as one and
state: ‘Here is preserved that body which was born of a virgin’.
• The crucifixion panel has a representation of St Michael, the archangel (to
whom the church was dedicated) to the right of the crucified, the Virgin on the
left and under her a priest, perhaps representing Galloway himself as donor,
standing beside an altar on which are Galloway’s initials.
• The sacrament house and the Crucifixion panel appear to have been part of a
liturgical revival in the diocese of Aberdeen during the early decade on the 16th
century. Alexander Galloway appear to have been a central figure in the move
to ensure parish churches had the fittings for the proper worship of God, and in
particular devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. He erected several sacrament
houses in churches he was involved in; Kinkell and its dependents at Dyce and
Kintore, and at King College, Aberdeen and may have been influential in the
decision of his colleagues, Alexander Spittal of Auchindoir and Alexander Lyon
of Turiff, to erect those in their respective churches. Galloway also donated a
font to Kinkell, which now is now in St John’s Episcopal Church, Aberdeen.
• The construction of the sacrament house may have been part of a wider
reorganisation of the chancel area of the church, and it is tempting to suggest
that the great E window may have been a part of this re-organisation, although
details of this moulding may be more consistent with a 14th or 15th century
date.
Social Overview
• The church is currently used as a recreational attraction. It receives little other
community use.
Spiritual Overview
• As a parish church in use for some six centuries, the site has the potential to
inform our understanding of medieval Christianity, the aspirations of the
rectors, vicars and ministers who served the church and the congregations
who worshipped in it.
• The burial ground was in use until fairly recently, and may still be in use for
occasional burials. People still visit family graves and memorials.
Aesthetic Overview
• The church and burial ground are located in the haughs of the River Don,
amongst arable farmland which adds to the appreciation of this monument.
The church has been pointed with a hard cement mortar that give the walls the impression of crazy paving.
The sacrament house, the replica crucifixion panel,
3/3 the window jamb are fine architectural details which are aesthetically very striking, and provide some idea of the glories of this once very fine church.
• The graveslab of Gilbert de Greenlaw, killed at the Battle of Harlaw, which would originally have been a ledger slab, is a particularly detailed carving of an armed knight.
What are the major gaps in understanding of the property?
• Do further historical sources or references survive.
• Nothing is known about the archaeology and earlier history of this site.
The church is an example, although much ruined, of a church which was remodelled in the 16th century.
The sacrament house is a particularly fine example of this type of church
furnishing, and the only example which takes the form of a cross.
Sacrament houses are physical manifestation of an important aspect of late medieval
Christianity; the veneration and adoration of the Body of Christ in the form of the consecrated host.
The church is closely associated with Canon Alexander Galloway, who encouraged a liturgical revival in the diocese in the early 16th century.
The site has high archaeological potential, but as a place of burial over centuries so the scope for research-led invasive excavation is not high.
Associated Properties
St Fergus’, Dyce, Auchindoir Church, St Machars Cathedral, Kintore Church,
THE ONLY SET OF LADY DEATHSTRIKE CLAWS IN EXISTENCE.
When Jimmy was working on the X2: X-Men United movie he was asked to make the set of claws for Lady Deathstrike. These are the only ones in existence.
These are Screen Used...Worn by actress Kelly Hu.
Again I cannot stress how rare these claws are...certified to be the only ones in existence.
Each and everyday they were fitted to actress Kelly Hu's hands. It would take Jimmy at least an hour to fit them to her hands. There were other lady deathstrike claws molded for the movie but they all were broken during filming and accounted for. When the scenes they were used in were finished the claws were put away in a specially made box and never really seen again. The silicon mold that made these claws was also destroyed after they were made.
This gothique castle had a pretty short existence, built at the end of the 13th Century, it was owned by honrable lords and bandits alike, and the last owner brought it in conflict with the king George of Poděbrady, and the royal army seized and demolished the castle in 1467. Still many remains can be found, the area is well accessible, many path lead around ruined palaces and towers, and the top presents a beautiful look into the landscape. The tower above the river and the earth wall beside it were built later as a base for mobile guns. The northern palace in the core is the best preserved building. In the woods the gate with a base for the falling bridge is still existent.
The Introduction:
Despite the overwhelming existence of the airways and ships as modes of transport and carriage services, the railways had, have and always will be an important transportation infrastructure. The railways virtually form the backbone of any country’s economy by transporting millions of passengers and tons of material through tens of thousands of miles round the clock, throughout the year.
Suggested Products:
Tsunami® QB-8200 Series
Tsunami™ MP-8200 Series
Tsunami™ MP-8100 Series
Tsunami® QB-8100 Series
Tsunami™ MP.11Series
Tsunami® QuickBridge®.11 Series
Tsunami® GX800
ORiNOCO® AP-8100
ORiNOCO® AP-4000
The Challenge:
Taking into account the number of trains running at high speeds separated by a few minutes on a common set of tracks, the railways as a system is a very intricate and a perilous enterprise. To control and coordinate the innards of this system, teams of experts need to watch the movements of the trains and in order to facilitate this, what better way than a video surveillance solution. However installing and linking cameras throughout the track is not only cost prohibitive but also at times cumbersome to implement in inaccessible geographies.
The Solution:
By leveraging Proxim’s wireless solutions railway organizations can cost effectively and effortlessly install various ITS components even in challenging spots such as underground tunnels etc. Additionally Proxim’s .11 series with its roaming capability allows passengers accessing the internet via Wi-Fi hotspots and control stations to seamlessly receive and transmit data from fast moving mobile trains.
Sarnath is the deer park where Gautama Buddha first taught the Dharma, and where the Buddhist Sangha came into existence through the enlightenment of Kondanna. Sarnath is located 13 kilometres north-east of Varanasi, in Uttar Pradesh, India.
The Buddha went from Bodhgaya to Sarnath about 5 weeks after his enlightenment. Before Gautama (the Buddha-to-be) attained enlightenment, he gave up his austere penances and his friends, the Pañcavaggiya monks, left him and went to Isipatana.
Isipatana is the name used in the Pali Canon, and means the place where holy men (Pali: isi, Sanskrit: rishi) landed.
After attaining Enlightenment the Buddha, leaving Uruvela, travelled to the Isipatana to join and teach them. He went to them because, using his spiritual powers, he had seen that his five former companions would be able to understand Dharma quickly. While travelling to Sarnath, Gautama Buddha had to cross the Ganges. Having no money with which to pay the ferryman, he crossed the Ganges through the air. When King Bimbisāra heard of this, he abolished the toll for ascetics. When Gautama Buddha found his five former companions, he taught them, they understood and as a result they also became enlightened. At that time the Sangha, the community of the enlightened ones, was founded. The sermon Buddha gave to the five monks was his first sermon, called the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta. It was given on the full-moon day of Asalha Puja. Buddha subsequently also spent his first rainy season at Sarnath at the Mulagandhakuti. The Sangha had grown to 60 in number (after Yasa and his friends had become monks), and Buddha sent them out in all directions to travel alone and teach the Dharma. All 60 monks were Arahants.
Several other incidents connected with the Buddha, besides the preaching of the first sermon, are mentioned as having taken place in Isipatana. Here it was that one day at dawn Yasa came to the Buddha and became an Arahant. It was at Isipatana, too, that the rule was passed prohibiting the use of sandals made of talipot leaves. On another occasion when the Buddha was staying at Isipatana, having gone there from Rājagaha, he instituted rules forbidding the use of certain kinds of flesh, including human flesh. Twice, while the Buddha was at Isipatana, Māra visited him but had to go away discomfited.
A stone pillar marks the spot where the Buddha preached his first sermon. Nearby was another stupa on the site where the Pañcavaggiyas spent their time in meditation before the Buddha's arrival, and another where five hundred Pacceka Buddhas entered Nibbāna. Close to it was another building where the future Buddha Metteyya received assurance of his becoming a Buddha.
Buddhism flourished in Sarnath in part because of kings and wealthy merchants based in Varanasi. By the third century Sarnath had become an important center for the arts, which reached its zenith during the Gupta period (4th to 6th centuries CE). In the 7th century by the time Xuan Zang visited from China, he found 30 monasteries and 3000 monks living at Sarnath.
Sarnath became a major centre of the Sammatiya school of Buddhism, one of the early Buddhist schools. However, the presence of images of Heruka and Tara indicate that Vajrayana Buddhism was (at a later time) also practiced here. Also images of Brahminist gods as Shiva and Brahma were found at the site, and there is still a Jain temple (at Chandrapuri) located very close to the Dhamekh Stupa.
At the end of the 12th century Sarnath was sacked by Turkish Muslims, and the site was subsequently plundered for building materials.
Sarnath has been developed as a place of pilgrimage, both for Buddhists from India and abroad. A number of countries in which Buddhism is a major (or the dominant) religion, among them Thailand, Japan, Tibet, Sri Lanka and Myanmar, have established temples and monasteries in Sarnath in the style that is typical for the respective country. Thus, pilgrims and visitors have the opportunity to experience an overview of Buddhist architecture from various cultures.
WIKIPEDIA
Took this image of the afternoon sun at Chatfield State park through a pair of sunglasses, then dropped the exposure through Aperture. The effect looks like an overly intense moon or something else. The ice on Lake Chatfield adds an unusual texture.
G10_ IMG_0173
Copyright © 2013 by cooper.gary. All rights reserved.
.......And out beyond its mortgaged half-built edges
Fast-shadowed wheat-fields, running high as hedges,
Isolate villages, where removed lives
Loneliness clarifies. Here silence stands
Like heat. Here leaves unnoticed thicken,
Hidden weeds flower, neglected waters quicken,
Luminously-peopled air ascends;
And past the poppies bluish neutral distance
Ends the land suddenly beyond a beach
Of shapes and shingle. Here is unfenced existence:
Facing the sun, untalkative, out of reach.
Here by Philip Larkin
Photograph taken at an altitude of Forty two metres, at 09:31am on Thursday 24th April 2014 off Cheapside and St Paul's Churchyard, close to Paul's Cross Memorial Statue in the grounds of St Paul's Cathedral.
The Cathedral was designed by architect Sir Christopher Wren, with construction commencing in 1675 and the official opening in 1708. It stands One hundred and eleven metres tall and is a Church of England cathedral, the seat of the Bishop of London and Mother Church of the Diocese of London, It sits at the top of Ludgate Hill, the highest point in the City of London.
.
.
Nikon D800 42mm 1/6400s f/2.8 iso200 RAW (14Bit)Handheld
Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED IF. Jessops 77mm UV filter. Nikon MB-D12 battery grip. Two Nikon EN-EL15 batteries. Digi Chip Speed Pro 64GB Class 10 SDXC. Nikon DK-17a magnifying eyepiece. Hoodman HGEC soft eyepiece cup. Nikon GP-1 GPS unit.
.
.
LATITUDE: N 51d 30m 51.20s
LONGITUDE: W 0d 5m 51.96s
ALTITUDE: 42.0m
RAW (TIFF) FILE: 103.00MB
PROCESSED FILE: 14.09MB
.
.
Processing power:
HP Pavillion Desktop with AMD A10-5700 APU processor. HD graphics. 2TB with 8GB RAM. 64-bit Windows 8.1. Verbatim USB 2.0 1TB desktop hard drive. Nikon VIEWNX2 Version 2.90 64bit. Adobe photoshop Elements 8 Version 8.0 64bit
Existence de edward bond au théâtre des argonautes à marseille
mise en scène francine eymery, collaboration artistique et scénographique jean-pierre girard
avec lionel barathieu et frédéric josse
Existence de edward bond au théâtre des argonautes à marseille
mise en scène francine eymery, collaboration artistique et scénographique jean-pierre girard
avec lionel barathieu et frédéric josse
Shattered Existence; Life’s cuts run deep…
Art Photography - Original macro painting was specifically made to be photographed. Acrylic, powder paint, paper and various other substances for texture, color and reflectivity.
This I truly feel is something different in my portfolio of photographs, time consuming to create, unreliable results but at the end, very unique...a few people on Flickr might remember these as I did it back in the beginning of the year and at the end of 2008 (I removed it and I thought it was more fitting for deviant art). I'm already planning on restarting as I have the equipment and supplies to do it again and the other photography will have to wait a little while as I'm a bit burnt out; I need a little change in direction again...
--------------------------
The automotive industry has seen many flops during its century-long existence, most of them due to poor thinking and execution. Every once in a while, though, some truly innovative vehicles receive the axe simply because they were ahead of their time.
Renault’s Avantime is one such an example. Built in cooperation with Matra, the coupe-MPV was unlike anything else on the road when it was launched in 2001. Unfortunately, buyers weren’t ready to embrace such a radical vehicle. Ironically, a decade later, oddities like the BMW X6 and Nissan Murano CrossCabriolet are on the verge of becoming trendsetters.
The Avantime’s history dates back to the early 1990s, when Philippe Guédon, head of automotive division at Matra, noted an important change in the customer base of the Espace.
He believed that children of Espace owners remained loyal to the brand even after they grew up, but also wanted Renault to give them something new, with a stronger focus on driving pleasure. This how the CoupéSpace concept came to be, a design study that offered the van’s versatility, clad in a 2+2 coupe body.
A partnership between Renault and Matra was signed in 1998 and the Avantime name was adopted. The chassis came from the Matra-built Espace III, while design guru Patrick Le Quément was responsible for the body and interior.
The key word for the coupe-MPV was innovation. In hindsight, this was an understatement, as the French maker boldly went where no one has gone before. The name, which sounds like "ahead of time", wasn’t just a cheap pun.
The Avantime featured a "one-box" setup, typical for an MPV, but eliminated the B-pillars to obtain the desired coupe look and had two enormous doors, for easy access. Much of the body was built using galvanized steel and polyester panels, while the upper structure was made from exposed aluminum. This lowered the center of gravity and improved rigidity, allowing engineers to fit the Avantime with a large sunroof.
Despite the very long doors, the Avantime could use a normal parking space without any trouble. It had a never before seen double parallel-opening system (dubbed "double-kinematic"), which minimized outswing.
Inside, the second row of seats was positioned higher, giving passengers a theater-like experience. The panoramic roof improved the sensation of space and, at a push of a button, it could be opened, together with all windows, for an "open air" mode.
The cabin featured four individual seats with incorporated seatbelts and clad in upscale leather. The interior design was minimalistic, but the materials and build quality was above average for the time.
Upon sale, the Avantime boasted a 3.0-liter V6 petrol engine, delivering 207 hp. Just like today, the large displacement scared away most European buyers and the smaller 2.0-liter petrol and 2.2-liter diesel powerplants were offered too late. Thus, Renault was simply unable to avoid the disaster that was shaping up.
In 2003, only two years into its lifecycle and with just 8,557 units sold, the futuristic Avantime was discontinued, in what was to become one of the biggest flops that the French maker had to endure.
However, the Avantime was not a bad car and it’s a prized item among collectors these days.
Bury St Edmunds Cathedral for most of its existence was simply the parish church of St James until the foundation of the new diocese of St Edmundsbury in 1914 when it was raised to cathedral status, one of the many new dioceses formed in the early 20th century that elevated existing parish churches to diocesan rank rather than purpose building a new cathedral. Many of these 'parish church cathedrals' sit slightly awkwardly with their new status, lacking in the scale and grandeur that befits such a title, but of all of them Bury St Edmunds has been adapted to its new role the most successfully, with in my opinion the most beautiful results.
The medieval church consisted of the present nave, built in 1503-51 under master mason John Wastell, with an earlier chancel that was entirely rebuilt in 1711 and again in 1870. Originally it would have seemed a fairly minor building at the entrance to the monastic precinct, overshadowed by the enormous abbey church that once stood immediately behind it. The absence of this magnificent church since the Dissolution and the scant remains of this vast edifice always sully my visits here with a sense of grievous loss, had history been kinder it would have served as the cathedral here instead and likely be celebrated as one of the grandest in the country.
The church never had a tower of its own since the adjacent Norman tower of the Abbey gateway served the role of a detached campanile perfectly. It is an impressive piece of Romanesque architecture and one of the best preserved 12th century towers in the country.
Upon being raised to cathedral status in 1914 the building underwent no immediate structural changes but plans were made to consider how best to transform a fairly ordinary church into a worthy cathedral. This task was appointed to architect Stephen Dykes Bower and work began in 1959 to extend the building dramatically. Between 1963-1970 the entire Victorian chancel was demolished and replaced with a much grander vision of a lofty new choir and shallow transepts, remarkably all executed in traditional Gothic style in order to harmonize with the medieval nave. It is incredible to think that this was done in the 1960s, a period in which church and cathedral buildings were otherwise constructed in the most self consciously modern forms ever seen, with delicate neo-medieval masonry in place of brick and concrete.
The new crossing of transepts and choir however remained crowned by the stump of a tower for the remainder of the century as funds were not available to finish Dykes Bower's complete vision of a lantern tower over the crossing: this was only realised at the beginning of the 21st century, aided by a legacy left in the architect's will and some subtle design changes under his successor as architect Hugh Matthews. The transformation from church to cathedral was finally completed in 2005 with most satisfactory results. A stunning fan-vault was installed within the new tower in 2010, an exquisite finishing touch.
Whilst it isn't a large building by cathedral standards its newer parts do much to give it the shape and dignity of one. This is especially apparent within, where the cruciform eastern limb draws the eye. The interior is enlivened by much colour, with the ceilings of Dykes Bower's choir and transepts adorned with rich displays of stencilling, whilst the nave ceiling (a Victorian replacement for the medieval one) was redecorated in similarly lively colours in the 1980s which helps to unify the old and new parts of the church.
Few fittings or features remain from the medieval period, most of the furnishings being Victorian or more recent, but one window in the south aisle retains a rich display of early 16th century stained glass, very much Renaissance in style. The remaining glass is nearly all Victorian, some of the windows in the new choir having been transferred from the previous chancel.
St Edmundsbury Cathedral is not filled with the monuments and fittings that make other great churches so rewarding to linger in but it is a real architectural delight and cannot fail to uplift the spirit.
Black Panther Party leader Huey Newton is shown in an undated image circa 1968.
Newton personified black armed resistance to police repression and the cry “Free Huey” could be heard at every left wing or black nationalist gathering for several years in the late 1960s.
Early Life
Huey Percy Newton was born on February 17, 1942, in Monroe, Louisiana. Newton helped establish the African-American political organization the Black Panther Party, and became a leading figure in the Black Power movement of the 1960s.
As a teenager growing up in Oakland, California, he got in trouble with the law—as he did numerous times throughout his life.
Black Panther Creation
Despite his legal run-ins, Newton began to take his education seriously. Although he graduated high school in 1959, Newton barely knew how to read. He became his own teacher, learning to read by himself. In the mid-1960s, Newton decided to pursue his education at Merritt College, where he met Bobby Seale.
The two were briefly involved with political groups at the school before they set out to create one of their own. Founded in 1966, they called their group the Black Panther Party for Self Defense.
Unlike many of the other social and political organizers of the time, they took a militant stance, advocating the ownership of guns by African Americans, and were often seen brandishing weapons. A famous photograph shows Newton—the group's minister of defense—holding a gun in one hand and a spear in the other.
The group believed that violence—or the threat of violence—might be needed to bring about social change. They set forth their political goals in a document called the Ten-Point Program, which included better housing, jobs, and education for African Americans.
It also called for an end to economic exploitation of black communities. Still the organization itself was not afraid to punctuate its message with a show of force. For example, to protest a gun bill in 1967, Newton and other members of the Panthers entered the California Legislature fully armed. The action was a shocking one that made news across the country. And Newton emerged as a leading figure in the black militant movement.
Arrest and Conviction
The Black Panthers wanted to improve life in black communities and establish social programs to help those in need. They also fought against police brutality in black neighborhoods by mostly white cops.
Members of the group would go to arrests in progress and watch for abuse. Newton himself was arrested in 1967 for allegedly killing an Oakland police officer during a traffic stop. He was later convicted of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to two to 15 years in prison.
But public pressure—"Free Huey" became a popular slogan of the day—helped Newton's cause. The case was eventually dismissed after two retrials ended with hung juries.
During its existence, members of the group clashed with police several times. The party's treasurer, Bobby Hutton, was even killed during of these conflicts in 1968.
In the 1970s, the Black Panthers began to fall apart. Key members left, and Newton faced more criminal charges. To avoid prosecution, he fled to Cuba in 1971, but he returned three years later.
Later Years
With the Panthers in disarray, Newton returned to school, earning a Ph.D. from the University of California, Santa Cruz, in 1980. In his final years, however, it is believed that he suffered from a drug problem. The once popular revolutionary died on August 22, 1989, in Oakland, California, after being shot on the street.
Despite a falling reputation in later years, Newton symbolized defiance against the armed repression of black people by the white power structure.
--most of this description is taken from Wikipedia
For more information and additional images of random radicals, see flic.kr/s/aHske413N1
The photographer is unknown. The image is an auction find.
Existence de edward bond au théâtre des argonautes à marseille
mise en scène francine eymery, collaboration artistique et scénographique jean-pierre girard
avec lionel barathieu et frédéric josse
St Paul's Church is situated in the New England area of Peterborough.
The Parish came into existence with the advent of the railways in the Nineteenth Century, although it can no longer be described as a railway parish. It comprises an inner urban housing estate with a population of 9,000 and growing all the time. It is very multi cultural and in the last 2 or 3 years around the Triangle area there has sprung up 4 small supermarkets which are mostly Polish/Lithuanian foods; a Lithuanian restaurant; an Afghanistan restaurant and a Turkish restaurant; a Polish fast take-away plus Indian, Chinese, Pizza. An established print & photocopy shop, Minuteman, are opposite the Vicarage & look after the printing of our church magazine plus other work we need doing.
St Paul’s Church is a Victorian building, which was built in 1869 but in the 1970s a certain amount of re-ordering inside happened when Father Secker was the Priest.