View allAll Photos Tagged Existence
Beware the roulette inside ones mind
Screaming and taunting, not allowing you to find
The revolution you are to generate
Pieced together from all possibilities to create
An endless existence of imagination and wonder
Because dreams are meant to be followed, not simply pushed under -Resa
Part of a series with
Etsy//.Website//.Blog//.Tumblr//.Inspiration Tumblr//.DeviantArt
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
Shots of the Causeway, a major traffic arterial from Perth across the Swan River connecting Adelaide Terrace and Riverside Drive to Albany Highway to Perth's south eastern suburbs. Prior to the construction of the Narrows Bridge and Kwinana Freeway in 1959 it provided the only river crossing from the Perth city centre.
The current bridge is the third to be constructed at this location. The first was a raised timber bridge between earthen embankments crossing what were then mudflats in 1843 and was operated a toll road initially. The low level meant the structure was prone to flooding. It was replaced by a second causeway in 1867 by a larger timber structure comprising of three bridges spanning the mudflats.
This was widened and strengthened in the early 20th century and again in the 1930's. Ultimately a footpath was added as well as a single tram track as part of Perth's tram system for the Victoria Park line in 1905. For the line's existence the causeway tram crossing remained single track with double track either side. Branches to South Perth and Como followed using the same line.
The third and current structure was completed in 1952 with two six lane bridges crossing a single Heirisson Island built up from the previous islands. The channels between were dredged to make them more navigable. Land was reclaimed on the western side near the present-day Adelaide Terrace-Riverside Drive intersection filling in the section which contained the third bridge of the 1867 causeway. This was the first major bridge in Perth and one of the first in Australia to be built using a composite steel concrete method, notable at the time as most road bridges in Western Australia crossing waterways were timber.
Trams never returned to the rebuilt causeway with the line to Como closing in June 1950 and Victoria Park December 1950. It was anticipated trolleybuses would serve these lines with additional vehicles ordered but wiring was never installed instead motor buses were used from that point onwards.
Traffic relief to the causeway would come in the form of the Graham Farmer Freeway in 2000. Afterwards the two centre lanes were converted to bus lanes which remain to this day.
Detail of the soffit of the steel concrete composite structure
Rubberrocken, a prominent deity in her narrative, is primarily known as the Goddess of Protection. Her extensive history details her evolution from an initial existence as Stacey, nicknamed "Shiny-Stacey," to her current divine status, marked by significant acts of safeguarding and creation across multiple universes.
Origins and Early Role
Rubberrocken's journey began in the "1st timeline" within "Multiverse 0019" and "Universe-17Z9," where she was known as Stacey, or "Shiny-Stacey," due to her fondness for latex fashion. Her inherent benevolence and willingness to help others led her to a celestial realm, described as "heaven for good latex girls," where she became one of the "angels of the shining light". These angels were depicted as beings composed of shiny latex, possessing lustrous features and wielding power augmented by "stones of power"
A defining moment in her early existence involved confronting "none shiny being" who sought to eradicate the "gloss" and "light" that sustained the angels' shininess. In this conflict, Shiny-Stacey, already embodying her protective nature, utilized her "Sword of destruction" to halt their destructive efforts, solidifying her role as a formidable protector against forces of diminishment and destruction.
Confrontation with Fetishiah and Ascension
Over time, darkness, characterized by greed, lust, and wickedness, began to infiltrate the Universes. Some "angels of the shining light" succumbed to these vices, transforming into "latex fallen angels of the black-gloss," with whips as their weapons. Among them was Fetishiah, who amassed followers and eventually corrupted the high temple, Latexetal, which was the source of the idea of shiny latex clothing. Fetishiah's act of sitting on the sacred throne of Latexetal, which was meant to remain unoccupied, turned the throne and the temple into black shiny latex, signifying her dominant power.
Witnessing the corruption and the falling of Universes under Fetishiah's dark influence, Shiny-Stacey took decisive action. She used her "Sword of destruction" to cut the throne of Latexetal in two, thereby stripping Latexetal and Fetishiah of their power. Following this pivotal act, the other angels recognized her heroism and renamed her Rubberrocken, the Goddess of Protection. She then became the goddess of the timeless void, accompanied by the other angels and Fetishiah, who later transformed into a Succubus of lust.
Creation of New Universes and the Stone of Seeing
As time progressed within Multiverse 0018, Rubberrocken encountered a group of outcast deities: Starsun (god of cosmos), Latexshinex (goddess of power), Gimmorrighte (goddess of light), Vida (goddess of life), and Aeon (god of time). Together, they collaborated to create new Universes, including Universe-27b2, which contained numerous worlds with powerful items.
During this period, they also encountered Goldglossin, a being made of shiny gold latex whose power and intentions were initially unclear. Despite Rubberrocken's initial perception of Goldglossin as sly, the group decided to include her, leading to the creation of the world Rubberia, named by Goldglossin due to its abundance of rubber. Subsequently, they created Dommalex, a world intended to be rich in power, magical items, and diverse races.
Within Dommalex, Latexshinex, the goddess of power, created the "Stone of Seeing" and gifted it to Aeon, the god of time and sight. However, Gimmorrighte, the goddess of light, foresaw the potential for the stone's misuse, particularly if it fell into the wrong hands. Due to this concern and the stone's immense power, Rubberrocken, in her role as the Goddess of Protection, hid the Stone of Seeing within Dommalex at the beginning of time, securing it with powerful spells.
Goldglossin's growing greed led her to attempt to seize the Stone of Seeing and five other overpowered stones to achieve ultimate rule. In response to Goldglossin's insatiable ambition, Latexshinex cast her into a crystal cave, which was then renamed the "Cave of Greed". Goldglossin's powers were turned against her within the cave, and she became the confined goddess of greed, imprisoned by Latexshinex for 10,000 years.
Evolution of Her Weaponry
Rubberrocken's weaponry has evolved alongside her divine status. Initially, she wielded the "Sword of destruction," which was capable of cutting through any material. This sword was instrumental in her early battles, including her confrontation with the "shineless ones" and her decisive action against Fetishiah.
One thousand years into the timeline of Dommalex, Rubberrocken bestowed her "Sword of destruction" upon Queen Lucy the Great, the founding monarch of the Queendom of Wallfort. At this time, Rubberrocken received an even more potent weapon: the "Sword of Obliteration". This new sword possessed extraordinary capabilities, described as being able to "take worlds apart," "cut off timelines," and even "cut shadows and light". This upgrade signifies her continued growth in power and her expanded role in maintaining order and protection across the multiverses.
Summary of Key Attributes and Roles
Rubberrocken's narrative consistently portrays her as a benevolent and powerful deity dedicated to protection and the preservation of light and order. Her key attributes and roles include:
1) Goddess of Protection: Her primary and most consistent identification.
2) Protector against Corruption: Demonstrated through her actions against the "none shiny being" and Fetishiah.
3) Creator of Universes: Collaborated with other deities to establish new realms like Universe-27b2, Rubberia, and Dommalex.
4) Guardian of Powerful Artifacts: Responsible for hiding the Stone of Seeing to prevent its misuse.
5) Wielder of Formidable Weapons: Progressed from the "Sword of destruction" to the "Sword of Obliteration," reflecting her increasing power and scope of influence.
6) Symbol of Benevolence: Her willingness to assist others and her inherent good nature are central to her character.
Her story is a testament to her unwavering commitment to combating darkness and ensuring the well-being of the universes she oversees.
For the first time in six years of existence, the P1 AquaX was hosting a World Championship event sanctioned by IJSBA and it happened in Key West, Florida December 9th and 10th 2017. Since the Thailand King's Cup was being held at the same time, only 18 of the 25 pilots that made the selection were racing this week end. Nevertheless, Key West was a beautiful destination to race, every morning brought a different colour of sunrise and the ever changing blue hues of the water made this race memorable. After marine and storm delays, day one was hard for David Chassier after experiencing mechanical problems. Day two was a little better even if the Yamaha FX SVHO was barely taking 7000 rpm, the French pilot from Blois managed to finish 12 and 13, which placed him 15 overall. A big thank you to Barefoot Billy's Jet Ski Rental that helped us train the first days in Key West as well as Redler's family that gave us assistance and support during the race. Congratulation to our friend Nicolas Rius on landing a 3rd place overall despite a bad shoulder injury and we wish him the best recovery so he can be back a the top for 2018. This was the last race of the season, see you next year :)
"Chatham Dockyard[...]came into existence at the time when, following the Reformation, relations with the Catholic countries of Europe had worsened, leading to a requirement for additional defences. For 414 years, Chatham Royal Dockyard provided over 500 ships for the Royal Navy, and was at the forefront of shipbuilding, industrial and architectural technology. At its height, it employed over 10,000 skilled artisans and covered 400 acres (1.6 km²). Chatham dockyard closed in 1984, and 84 acres (340,000 m2) of the Georgian dockyard is now managed as a visitor attraction by the Chatham Historic Dockyard Trust.
"By the late 17th century it was the largest refitting dockyard, important during the Dutch wars. It was, however, superseded in the following century, first by Portsmouth, then Plymouth, when the main naval enemy became France, and the Western approaches the chief theatre of operations. In addition, the Medway had begun to silt up, making navigation more difficult. Nevertheless, the decision was taken to invest further in Chatham, which developed into a building yard rather than a refitting base. Among many vessels built in this Dockyard, and which still exist, are HMS Victory, launched in 1765 – now preserved at Portsmouth Historic Dockyard (formerly Portsmouth Royal Dockyard).
"By the year 1770 the establishment had so expanded that, including the gun wharf, it stretched a mile (1.6 km) in length, and included an area of in excess of 95 acres (384,000 m²), possessing four slip ways and four large docks. The officers and men employed in the yard also increased, and by 1798 they numbered 1,664, including 49 officers and clerks and 624 shipwrights. Additionally required were the blockmakers, caulkers, pitch-heaters, blacksmiths, joiners and carpenters, sail makers, riggers, and ropemakers (274), as well as bricklayers, labourers and others. Between 1862 and 1885, the yard underwent another large building programme as the Admiralty adjusted to the new technology of steam-powered ships with metal hulls. Three basins were constructed along St Mary's creek: of 28 acres (110,000 m2), 20 acres (81,000 m2) and 21 acres (85,000 m2).
"The final boats constructed in Chatham were Oberon class submarines – Ocelot was the last vessel built for the Royal Navy, and the final vessel was Okanagan built for the Royal Canadian Navy and launched on 17 September 1966. In 1968, a nuclear submarine refitting complex was built complete with refuelling cranes and health physics building. In spite of this in June 1981, it was announced to Parliament that the dockyard would be run down and closed in 1984."
Source: Wikipedia
States of Existence developed during the winter & spring terms by the 2015 Choreography Workshop students, includes both solo and group work that focus on the idea of the individual in relation to 'other.' The following question is presented: How is individual identity created? To see more about Knox's Dance program: www.knox.edu/academics/majors-and-minors/dance
There is no possible objective basis of morality without God's existence.
In philosophical debates, Essentialist Divine Command Theory underscores a logical explanation of objective morality based on God's existence. This is a partial outline from a debate linked afterward....
R: Brit offers a very good question: “...how does my opponent defend that these things are good?” How can I defend that moral qualities attributed to God are “actually” good? The question is similar to: What is the standard outside of God that I use to claim to know what goodness is like in order to then claim that God is good? If I merely claim that God represents goodness and goodness is defined by God, then this is a tautology. I can address these questions with the following approaches.
I. Conceptual necessities and possibilities. - Based on the understanding that an objective basis of morality must be non-arbitrary and, “not influenced by personal feelings or opinions,” a non-arbitrary moral basis is only conceivably possible if, A) There is a supreme and capable moral authority and law giver that provides perfect moral decrees (see Essentialist Divine Command Theory, IV.4.), or, B) There is a valid and objective locus or standard of morality ( a perfect moral yardstick that applies to all moral agents and all moral questions). There is no possible manner that secular humanism could provide either A or B. It is logically possible, however, that both A and B are possible if God exists. Only a perfect moral being could be capable of providing perfect moral decrees. Therefore, in keeping with our definitions and conditions of “morality” and “objective” as concepts, only God could be considered an objective basis of morality. In this case we do not need to define “goodness” specifically in order to understand that an objective basis of morality must be attached to a concept of “God” - if it is possible at all metaphysically.
II. Empirical evidence confirmed by conventional definitions. - I can define what “goodness” and “morality” are “like” as qualities, without an appeal to God. Brit has proposed to offer an affirmative argument that there is an objective basis of morality. And I concur with Brit that “most of us agree” that there is an objective basis of morality, whether or not it can be logically explained and accounted for. Though we cannot demonstrate and prove that moral qualities exist in a science laboratory, human experience does concur with conventional definitions in a remarkable manner that certain things are “right” and others are “wrong” with these experiences being consistent with concepts such as goodness, honesty, justice, holiness, and so on. I agree with Dr. Craig that, “I clearly apprehend objective moral values and have no good reason to deny what I clearly perceive.” In other words, I have strong reasons to believe that “goodness” is an objectively “good” quality before examining what is logically possible as the meta-ethical objective basis. I am not thus arbitrarily “presuming that the [moral] aspects of God's nature are good” - but I have an empirical moral conscience and conventional definitions that testify that these qualities are good and based on Point I, God's existence would be the only possible explanation.
III. Possible historical events. - If we grant God's existence as a metaphysical possibility, then it's possible that certain biblical accounts of Jesus Christ, acting as Messiah, God incarnate, could be based on actual historical events. For example, Peter described Jesus performing an apparent miracle: “When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus' knees and said, "Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!" (Luke 5.8). After living with Jesus for three years, the apostles apparently had such a firm conviction that Jesus was the morally-perfect Messiah that they (and their families) were willing to die for their testimony of Jesus as God incarnate, rather than recant and live.
First, I'd offer that Jesus spoke with a supreme moral authority and no one was apparently able to overcome his moral positions. His apparent goodness was so extraordinary that people came out of nowhere and wept at his feet, even as He forgave their sin (moral error). (Luke 7:36-50). It was not difficult for people to see that His standards were shown to be much higher than average, even assessed as perfect. If we allow the metaphysical possibility of God's existence, then it is possible that Jesus, as God incarnate, displayed perfect holiness and moral authority. One could ask: “How can we verify the standard of an apparent standard?” When John the Baptist doubted Jesus' authenticity, Jesus responded, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor.” (Luke 7.22b NIV). Jesus basically refereed to historic prophecies He fulfilled, as only God incarnate could have. These hold veracity, and I agree with Dr. Craig that other evidence, including Craig's four other arguments for God's existence, can be considered as relevant, if I am supposed to offer support as to why it should be considered that an objective basis of morality is based on God's existence. If other arguments support the greater plausibility that God exists, then this offers greater plausibility that objective morality is based on God. As Craig notes, “In the [Craig-Law] debate, Law made the remarkable claim that the cosmological and teleological arguments are not even part of a cumulative case for theism! This is clearly wrong.”
If Christ did indeed live and walk the earth as a perfect moral authority, then the “goodness” and “rightness” of His authority was displayed physically and in action in many circumstances. In this case, “goodness” and “rightness” are identical to the qualities of “Messiah-ness” or “Jesus-ness” that had been displayed. Without “definitions alone” this perfect moral standard was experienced directly in society.
Jesus displayed moral acts and people recognized that these were “good”acts and these His life was morally superior to their own, in fact perfect. The only ones that opposed this conception were those that were offended by the possibility that Jesus was, in fact, God, as Jesus indirectly claimed. He claimed that the true standard of morality was moral perfection (Matthew 5.48). In order for my position to be valid, I don't necessarily have to prove that Jesus was actually morally perfect and actually exemplified it, I just have to substantiate that it is metaphysically and logically possible that He lived a morally perfect life and displayed perfect moral authority (in accordance with 4.I.A). I also want to emphasize that I am discussing a basis of objective morality, not a moral system or applied ethics in this example.
Second, Jesus could be considered the, “living yardstick” and standard of perfect moral authority. If there is ever a discrepancy regarding a manufactured yardstick, then it can be taken and compared to the original metal yardstick which was made precisely as a universal standard. If Jesus is Messiah, then it is metaphysically possible that He embodies perfect holiness and moral purity, as a consistent standard. This state could be considered, “objective” as, “irrelevant to the opinions and preferences of any subjective being.” If Brit can prove that Jesus did not exist, that Jesus was not actually God incarnate, that Jesus committed any moral error, or that Jesus was not recognized as exemplifying a comparatively perfect moral standard, then Brit could remove this possibility. Otherwise, Jesus Christ can conceivably provide support for an exemplary perfect moral standard (a basis - not an applied ethical system) and a logical bridge from “is” to “ought” without a tautology.
If you'd like to see the entire debate so far, it's at this link to Templestream Blog Titled: "Debate: "Secular Humanism Offers an Objective Basis of Morality"
templestream.blogspot.com/2016/05/debate-secular-humanism...
History
A Norman church was in existence at the time of the Domesday Book and was largely rebuilt in the 14th century. Restorations were carried out in 1851 and in the 1970s.
Structure
The church is built from red sandstone, the chancel and porch are roofed with Welsh slate while the rest of the roof is covered in purple tiles.The south doorway is Norman in style, decorated with chevrons but rather obscured by a porch of later date. The porch contains stone benches and on its walls are knife-sharpening slots.The tower is Perpendicular in style and dates from around 1500. The plan of the church consists of a tower at the west end in line with a nave of four bays and a chancel of three bays. There is a north aisle with a chapel at the west end extending as far as the chancel.
Fittings and furniture
All the pews are box pews and are the oldest in Wirral; at one time their doors were fitted with locks and keys. In the north aisle is a canopied churchwardens' pew dated 1709 and a three-decker pulpit. The altar rails date from the late 17th or early 18th century and the lectern from the late 18th century. It has been said that much of this wooden furniture was moved from a church in Chester in 1812. Some of the windows contain 14th century stained glass. The brass chandelier dates from the late 18th century. The church plate includes a silver chalice and a pewter flagon both dated 1685. The parish registers date from 1698.The ring consists of six bells. The oldest two bells by William Clibury are dated 1616 and 1621. The other four bells were cast in 1938 by John Taylor & Co.
External features
In the churchyard the gates, gatepiers and churchyard wall along north side of Shotwick Lane are Grade II listed buildings. Also listed Grade II are the red sandstone sundial consisting of a tall bulbous baluster on square base dated 1720 and the tomb chests of James Phillips, John Nevett Bennett, Rev M Reay and 4 children, Robert and Martha Ellison, William Briscoe (died 1704) and others, and William Briscoe (died 1723) and others.
Walking downtown on a snowy day, I noticed this dead raccoon in the middle of the road. He must have been hit by a car on the previous night. Seeing the juxtaposition of the dead animal laying so close to the parked car and with the snow gradually covering him up made me wonder about the co-existence of nature and man.
“Her existence alone was excuse enough to justify the creation of the entire world.”
― Stephenie Meyer
The Royal Armouries began life as the main royal and national arsenal housed in the Tower of London. Indeed the Royal Armouries has occupied buildings within the Tower for making and storing arms, armour and military equipment for as long as the Tower itself has been in existence.
Early in the 19th century the nature and purpose of the museum began to change radically. Displays were gradually altered from exhibitions of curiosities to historically ‘accurate’ and logically organised displays designed to improve the visitor by illuminating the past.
Origins
The origins of the Armouries may be traced back to the working armoury of the medieval kings of England. The first recorded visitor to the Tower Armouries was in 1498, when entry was only by special permission. After the restoration of Charles II in 1660, the paying public was allowed in to marvel at new displays set up to celebrate the power and splendour of English monarchy.
The Armouries is one of the ancient institutions of the Tower of London, which have also included the Board of Ordnance, the Menagerie, the Royal Mint, the Jewel House, the Royal Observatory and the Tower Record Office. These institutions are the focus of a permanent exhibition in the White Tower – Powerhouse).
An important chapter in its development occurred in the early 15th century, with the emergence of the Office of Armoury as an offshoot of the Privy Wardrobe of the Tower. At this point it seems that the positions ‘Keeper of the King’s armour at the Tower of London’ (first mentioned in 1423) and the ‘Master of the Ordnance’ (first recorded in 1414) replaced the previous ‘Keeper of the Wardrobe’.
The offices of the Armoury and Ordnance were responsible for procuring and issuing a wide variety of military equipment. The Armoury concentrated on armour and edged weapons; the Ordnance concentrated on cannon, handguns and the more traditional bow and arrow. Developments in the art of war resulted in the Ordnance becoming the more important of the two organisations, and in 1670 the equipment and functions of the Office of Armoury passed to the Ordnance.
16th–17th centuries
By the end of the 16th century, some of the early visitors to the Tower began to record their impressions of the Armoury. Jacob Rathgar, secretary of Frederick, Duke of Wirtenburg, described what they were shown in 1592. Despite the presence of many fine pieces of artillery, Rathgar felt the collection did not compare with those in his native Germany for ‘they stand about in the greatest confusion and disorder’.
Paul Hentzner provided the first detailed description of the Armoury after a visit to London in 1598. He was shown many items belonging to Henry VIII, including a gilt suit of armour, and several historic cannon; among them two wooden pieces used to deceive the French at the siege of Boulogne in 1544.
The following year Joseph Platter, a Swiss traveller from Basle, visited the Tower and again paid attention to the personal armoury of Henry VIII, which he makes clear was located in the White Tower. Interestingly, reference is made to the cost of viewing the Armoury, with payments being made at four points in the building ‘to a servant appointed to receive the same’.
Rathgar’s complaint in 1592 about the disorderly appearance of the Armoury, repeated by the Duke of Stettin-Pomerania a decade later, suggests that little attention was paid to presentation in the late 16th and early 17th centuries.
This situation was to change immediately after the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660, when two permanent public displays were set up, known as the Line of Kings and the Spanish Armoury.
The former, as the name suggests, was a row of figures representing the kings of England. They appeared on life-sized wooden horses wearing what was said to be their personal armour. The line was first recorded in the Tower in an inventory dated October 1660, and it is possible that the display was assembled to mark Charles II’s visit to the Tower of London in August that year, after his many years in exile.
The Spanish Armoury was a collection of fearsome-looking weapons, displayed alongside a few instruments of torture, claimed to have been taken from the Spanish Armada in 1588. However, the historical basis for this association was quite unsound, with few, if any, of the objects having Spanish connections.
17th–19th centuries
Towards the end of the 17th century, the Office of Ordnance added two new armouries’ displays to the visitor attractions at the Tower. These were housed in one of the largest and most prestigious buildings ever to be seen at the Tower – the Grand Storehouse – that was built on the high ground immediately north of the White Tower.
The third, and most fantastic, display was installed on the first floor in 1696. Under the supervision of John Harris of Eaton, tens of thousands of small arms, and a mass of elaborate wooden carvings, were used to create such diverse installations as the ‘Witch of Endor’, the ‘Back Bones of a Whale’, a huge organ, and a seven-headed monster.
In the great Artillery Hall stood the great guns of the artillery train. As time went by, however, the room increasingly took on the appearance of a museum of military power, in which cannon and other trophies captured from battlefields around the world were brought here and displayed.
Also to be seen were items of curiosity and historic interest. Perhaps one of the most infamous was the Tower ‘Rack to extort Confession’. Last prepared for use in January 1673, the rack had presumably been decommissioned by June 1675, as it then appears in the first of several Ordnance inventories.
Throughout the 18th and into the early 19th century, the Ordnance continued to adjust and embellish its four armouries at the Tower. In 1825, the decision was taken to re-locate the Line of Kings into a new building against the south side of the White Tower.
The Horse Armoury was architecturally significant as it represented the first purpose-built museum gallery at the Tower. With the move, the notable antiquarian Dr Samuel Meyerick reorganised the exhibits along more scholarly and scientific lines.
Moreover, the Ordnance began to release funds allowing objects to be bought for the first time to expand the collection in specific and targeted, areas. Together with inaugural efforts at object conservation, the first decisive steps had been taken to transform the Tower armouries into a modern museum.
19th–21st centuries
In 1838 the cost of visiting the Tower Armouries was cut from 3 shillings to 1 shilling and lowered again the following year to 6d. The effect of these reductions was to see visitor numbers rise from 10,500 in 1837 to 80,000 in 1839.
On the evening of 30 October 1841 the Grand Storehouse was engulfed by a terrible fire destroying most
Edge Lane Junction signal box in the Wavertree district of Liverpool. Part of the Bootle branch, the LNWR design cabin closed in 1987 after an arson attack and, with dock traffic declining, the Olive Mount chord of a triangular junction was abandoned. The latter has since been reinstated.
States of Existence developed during the winter & spring terms by the 2015 Choreography Workshop students, includes both solo and group work that focus on the idea of the individual in relation to 'other.' The following question is presented: How is individual identity created? To see more about Knox's Dance program: www.knox.edu/academics/majors-and-minors/dance
But fear of the inexplicable has not alone impoverished
the existence of the individual; the relationship between
one human being and another has also been cramped by it,
as though it had been lifted out of the riverbed of
endless possibilities and set down in a fallow spot on the
bank, to which nothing happens. For it is not inertia alone
that is responsible for human relationships repeating
themselves from case to case, indescribably monotonous and
unrenewed: it is shyness before any sort of new,unforeseeable
experience with which one does not think oneself able to cope.
But only someone who is ready for everything, who excludes
nothing, not even the most enigmatical, will live the relation
to another as something alive and will himself draw exhaustively
from his own existence. For if we think of this existence of
the individual as a larger or smaller room, it appears evident
that most people learn to know only a corner of their room, a
place by the window, a strip of floor on which they walk up and
down. Thus they have a certain security. And yet that dangerous
insecurity is so much more human which drives the prisoners in
Poe's stories to feel out the shapes of their horrible dungeons
and not be strangers to the unspeakable terror of their abode.
We, however, are not prisoners. No traps or snares are set about
us, and there is nothing which should intimidate or worry us.
We are set down in life as in the element to which we best
correspond, and over and above this we have through thousands of
years of accommodation become so like this life, that when we
hold still we are, through a happy mimicry,scarcely to be
distinguished from all that surrounds us. We have no reason to
mistrust our world, for it is not against us. Has it terrors,
they are our terrors; has it abysses, those abuses belong to us;
are dangers at hand, we must try to love them. And if only we
arrange our life according to that principle which counsels us
that we must always hold to the difficult, then that which now
still seems to us the most alien will become what we most trust
and find most faithful. How should we be able to forget those
ancient myths about dragons that at the last moment turn into
princesses; perhaps all the dragons of our lives are princesses
who are only waiting to see us once beautiful and brave. Perhaps
everything terrible is in its deepest being something helpless
that wants help from us.
Fear of the Inexplicable by Rainer Maria Rilke
For the first time in six years of existence, the P1 AquaX was hosting a World Championship event sanctioned by IJSBA and it happened in Key West, Florida December 9th and 10th 2017. Since the Thailand King's Cup was being held at the same time, only 18 of the 25 pilots that made the selection were racing this week end. Nevertheless, Key West was a beautiful destination to race, every morning brought a different colour of sunrise and the ever changing blue hues of the water made this race memorable. After marine and storm delays, day one was hard for David Chassier after experiencing mechanical problems. Day two was a little better even if the Yamaha FX SVHO was barely taking 7000 rpm, the French pilot from Blois managed to finish 12 and 13, which placed him 15 overall. A big thank you to Barefoot Billy's Jet Ski Rental that helped us train the first days in Key West as well as Redler's family that gave us assistance and support during the race. Congratulation to our friend Nicolas Rius on landing a 3rd place overall despite a bad shoulder injury and we wish him the best recovery so he can be back a the top for 2018. This was the last race of the season, see you next year :)
I had a long talk with my aunt today.
The initial discussion was an attempt to pursued me to go to Alaska with her family over the summer instead of doing my solo euro backpacking adventure, because Alaska is beautiful & just as photo worthy as Europe, plus i'd be avoiding more dangers in Alaska with family then in Europe alone. I understood where she was coming from and quietly said "uhuhs" when needed, dreading telling her I was going to pick Europe, knowing she'd disapprove.
A few hours after that she called me again and apologized. She said that i'm twenty and that this is what i've been wanting to do for years and she's wrong to discourage me, she ran through a safety list with me then blew me a kiss over the phone.
I am blessed to have family that genuinely cares about my safety and understands my dreams and lets me go for them.
*I am selling prints to fund my upcoming Euro-trip, please message me here, or on FB if you're interested! Thank You*
Instagram: @madelineire
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
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
History
A Norman church was in existence at the time of the Domesday Book and was largely rebuilt in the 14th century. Restorations were carried out in 1851 and in the 1970s.
Structure
The church is built from red sandstone, the chancel and porch are roofed with Welsh slate while the rest of the roof is covered in purple tiles.The south doorway is Norman in style, decorated with chevrons but rather obscured by a porch of later date. The porch contains stone benches and on its walls are knife-sharpening slots.The tower is Perpendicular in style and dates from around 1500. The plan of the church consists of a tower at the west end in line with a nave of four bays and a chancel of three bays. There is a north aisle with a chapel at the west end extending as far as the chancel.
Fittings and furniture
All the pews are box pews and are the oldest in Wirral; at one time their doors were fitted with locks and keys. In the north aisle is a canopied churchwardens' pew dated 1709 and a three-decker pulpit. The altar rails date from the late 17th or early 18th century and the lectern from the late 18th century. It has been said that much of this wooden furniture was moved from a church in Chester in 1812. Some of the windows contain 14th century stained glass. The brass chandelier dates from the late 18th century. The church plate includes a silver chalice and a pewter flagon both dated 1685. The parish registers date from 1698.The ring consists of six bells. The oldest two bells by William Clibury are dated 1616 and 1621. The other four bells were cast in 1938 by John Taylor & Co.
External features
In the churchyard the gates, gatepiers and churchyard wall along north side of Shotwick Lane are Grade II listed buildings. Also listed Grade II are the red sandstone sundial consisting of a tall bulbous baluster on square base dated 1720 and the tomb chests of James Phillips, John Nevett Bennett, Rev M Reay and 4 children, Robert and Martha Ellison, William Briscoe (died 1704) and others, and William Briscoe (died 1723) and others.
States of Existence developed during the winter & spring terms by the 2015 Choreography Workshop students, includes both solo and group work that focus on the idea of the individual in relation to 'other.' The following question is presented: How is individual identity created? To see more about Knox's Dance program: www.knox.edu/academics/majors-and-minors/dance
History of Kraków
First indications of the existence of Krakow approximately stem from the 7th century. In the next following centuries the tribe of Vistulans (Wislanie) populated Krakow, after they centuries ago in the as "Lesser Poland" or Malopolska known region had settled down. From the year 965 stems the first document from Krakow, as Abraham ben Jacob of Cordova, a Jewish merchant, in his book referred to the trading center of Krakow.
In 1000, the Diocese of Krakow was founded and in 1038 declared capital of the Piast dynasty. The Wawel castle and several churches were built in the 11th century and thus the town rapidly grew. 1241 the Mongols invaded the city and burned down Krakow without exception. 1138 Krakow became the seat of the senior prince. 1257 Kraków was awarded its town charter and a city map was drawn up, which remained until today. This one included the arrangement of the checkerboard street configuration with a centrally located market. On the market following the seat of the city government was built. From the historical trading functions until today only the Cloth Halls remained. But on the market not only trade agreements were closed but also courtly and urban festivities celebrated. Furthermore, the urban center served for executions. The defensive walls were built, which surrounded the city and linked it to the Wawel. In the south of Wawel Castle in 1335 the city of Kazimierz was created. By Royal command it was surrounded by defense walls and the churches of St. Catherine, of Corpus Christi and the "Na Skalce" were built. End of the 15th century, Jews settled the later Cracow district. 1364 the Cracow Academy of King Kazimierz Wielki was founded, the famous Polish Jagellonen-University.
With the last king of Jagellonian dynasty, Krakow flourished. The Wawel castle was rebuilt in Renaissance style, the well known Zygmunt chapel was built and the Cloth Halls as well as the patrician houses have been restored. During the reign of King Sigismund III. Vasa the baroque style received introduction in Krakow. The Baroque University Church of St. Anne and the Church of Saints Peter and Paul were built in this period. In 1607 Warsaw was declared headquarters of the King, but Krakow retained its title of the Royal capital. Furthermore, it remained the place of coronations and funerals. Middle of the 17th century, the city was devastated by the Swedes, what at the beginning of the 18th century was produced again.
After the first partition of Poland, Krakow became a frontier town. Austria declared the settlement Podgorze separated city. After the second division in 1794, began the Polish national uprising. After its decline and the third partition of Poland the town fell to the Austrians, which on Wawel Hill caused numerous devastations and adapted buildings to the wishes and needs of the Army. 1809 Cracow was affiliated to the Grand Duchy of Warsaw. After the defeat of Napoleon, Krakow in the Vienna Convention of 1815 was declared Free City of Kraków. Then the remains of folk hero Tadeusz Kosciuszko and of Prince Jozef Poniatowski were brought back to the city. 1820-1823 on the rise of St. Bronislava a hill in honor of the leader of the popular uprising was built. Instead of the city walls, which were largely destroyed, they laid out supporting beams. 1846 Krakow lost its independence and the Austrians erected again on the Wawel barracks and they surrounded the Wawel with fortification complexes. However, Austria but has proved less tyrannical and so the city enjoyed a certain degree of growing cultural and political freedom. 1918 Krakow became the independence back.
Before the outbreak of the Second World War, in Krakow lived about 260,000 inhabitants, of which 65,000 belonged to the Jewish religion. During the war, also Krakow became witness of German war crimes. The for the greater part Jewish district of Kazimierz was eradicated. The Jews from now on lived in ghettos where they either were deported from there to Auschwitz or immediately shot. In spite of the plundering of the Nazis, Krakow became no scene for military combat operations and thus the only large Polish town escaping this fate. Therefore, its old architecture still almost completely is intact.
After the surrender of Germany and the Polish liberation, hastened the Communist government to inspire the traditional life and the city with a large steel plant in Nowa Huta. But the intensive rebuilding of the economy and industry rather promoted an ecological disaster. Buildings that had survived the war undamaged were now devoured and destroyed by acid rain and toxic gases. Carbon dioxide emissions grew so powerful that this has remained a serious and grave problem of the city. After the fall of the Communists and the fall of the Iron Curtain Krakow has benefited greatly from tourism and has adapted itself to a large extent to the Western culture.
3D red/cyan anaglyph created from glass plate stereograph at Library of Congress - Prints & Photographs Online Catalog: www.loc.gov/pictures/
LOC Title: Richmond, Va. Castle Thunder, Cary Street
Link to glass plate: www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2018666747/
Date: April 1865
Photographer: Not identified
Notes: The view we see here is after the Confederates had evacuated the city and set fire to the warehouse district, both Castle Thunder and nearby Libby prison survived the conflagration. The soldiers on the street are Union soldiers and the men peering out the prison windows are quite likely newly incarcerated Confederates. While the Confederates controlled the prison, the guards had license to shoot dead anyone peering out a window, and included below, is one such account.
Inmates were often jailed on trumped-up charges of disloyalty; I read of one case where a Confederate officer had a Richmond man jailed so he could get his wife, and he did (in the biblical sense). Note that both southern and northern prisoners received the same inhumane treatment.
Below, a brief summary on Castle Thunder from the NPS, Richmond National Battlefield Park, and then several Civil War era accounts for additional background information:
-------------------------------
"Castle Thunder - Gleanor’s Tobacco Factory and two smaller brick buildings, Palmer’s Factory and Whitlock’s Warehouse, were seized by the Confederate government and repurposed as a prison. This complex was aptly named for its extreme brutality: Castle Thunder. The three buildings housed 1,400 political prisoners and deserters who were segregated by gender, race, and criminal offense. Conditions at Castle Thunder were particularly inhumane with extreme physical punishment and abuse. It has been noted that on principal, prison officials would often give 50 to 100 lashes to newly arriving Confederate deserters.
Like Libby Prison, Castle Thunder survived the evacuation fire that destroyed nearly all other tobacco factories and warehouses in the city. Following the war, the property was returned to its original owners, who set the compound on fire in 1879.
During its existence, Castle Thunder held roughly one hundred women, including one who would become the only female to receive the Medal of Honor. [See link below]
NPS Link to Dr. Mary Edwards Walker: www.nps.gov/rich/learn/historyculture/doctor-mary-edwards...
-------------------------
Campaigns of a Non-combatant: And His Romaunt Abroad During the War, by George Alfred Townsend, published 1866
…..Leaving Richmond proper, and descending into the low, squalid portion of the town known as Rocketts, one sees among the many large warehouses, used without exception for the storage of tobacco, a certain one more irregular than the rest. An archway leads into it, and upon the outside of the second story windows runs a long ledge or footway, whereupon sentries used to stride, guarding the miserable people within. This is the jail of Castle Thunder, and it was the civil or State prison of the capital.
Ill as were the accommodations of prisoners of war, the treatment of their own unoffending citizens by the Rebel government was ten times more infamous. We could not repress indignation, nor by any philosophic or charitable effort excuse the atrocious tyranny which here lashed, chained, handcuffed, tortured, shot, and hung, hundreds of people whom it could not stultify or impress…. thus the terrible testimony of this Castle Thunder is an everlasting stigma upon the Southern cause.
We entered its strong portal, and there in the new commandant's room lay the record left behind by the Confederates. Its pages made one shudder. These are some of the entries:
"George Barton, giving food to Federal prisoners of war; forty lashes upon the bare back. Approved. Sentence carried into effect July 2.
"Peter B. Innis, passing forged government notes; chain and ball for twelve months; forty lashes a day. Approved.
"Arthur Wright, attempting to desert to the enemy; sentenced to be shot. Approved. Carried into effect, March 26.
"John Morton, communicating with the enemy; to be hung. Approved. Carried into effect, March 26."
In an inner room are some fifty pairs of balls and chains, with anklets and handcuffs upon them, which have bent the spirit and body of many a resisting heart. Within are two condemned cells, perfectly dark a faded flap over the window peep-hole the smell from which would knock a strong man down.
For in their centre lies the sink, ever open, and the floors are sappy with uncleanliness. To the right of these, a door leads to a walled yard not forty feet long, nor fifteen wide, overlooked by the barred windows of the main prison rooms, and by sentry boxes upon the wall-top. Here the wretched were shot and hung in sight of their trembling comrades. The brick wall at the foot of the yard is scarred and crushed by balls and bullets which, first passed through some human heart and wrote here their damning testimony.
The gallows had been suspended from a wing in the ledge, and in mid-air the impotent captive swung, none daring or willing to say a good word for him; and not for any offence against God's law, not for wronging his neighbor, or shedding blood, or making his kind miserable, but for standing in the way of an upstart organization, which his impulse and his judgment alike impelled him to oppose. This little yard, bullet-marked, close, and shut from all sympathy, is to us the ghastliest spot in the world.
Can Mr. Davis visit it, and pray as he does so devoutly afterward? When men plead the justice of the South, and arguments are prompt to favor them, let this prison yard rise up and say that no such crimes in liberty's name have ever been committed, on this continent, at least.
Upstairs in Castle Thunder, there are two or three large rooms, barred and dimly lit, and two or three series of condemned cells, pent-up and pitchy, where, by a refinement of cruelty, the ceiling has been built low so that no man can stand upright. Here fifteen or twenty were crowded together, and, in the burning atmosphere, they stripped themselves stark naked, so that when in the morning the cell-doors were opened, they came forth as from the grave, begging for death. There are women's cells too; for this great and valiant government recognized women as belligerents, and locked them up close to a sentry's cartridge, so that, in the bitterness of solitude, they were unsexed, and railed, and blasphemed, like wanton things.
On the pavements before the jail were hidden numberless guards, who shot at every rag fluttering from the cages, and all this little circle of death and terror was enacted close to the bright river, and airy pediment of that high capitol, where bold men hoped by war to wring from a reluctant Union, acknowledgment of arrogant independence to rein civilization as it pleased, and warp the destinies of our race.
-------------------------
Patriot Boys and Prison Pictures
By James Roberts Gilmore, published 1866
CASTLE THUNDER.
I was in Richmond in the month of July, 1864, and, in company with the Rebel Exchange Commissioner, made a visit to Castle Thunder. It is a very famous prison; and, as you may not have seen it described, I have thought a short account of it might be interesting to you.
It is on the same street with the Libby Prison, and very near to it; but is much smaller than that building, and was used for the confinement of Northern civilians and Southern non-combatants, who had incurred the ill-will of the Rebel government.
...Its walls were plastered; but its rooms were small, and, when I visited them, filthy and desolate in the extreme. In each one a dozen haggard, homesick men were crowded; and there, in a space not more than twenty feet square, were obliged to eat, and sleep, and dream their lives away, day after day, and month after month, until the slow year rolled round, and went down to the other years which had gone to the great eternity.
I was not allowed to talk with any of the inmates, and so learned little of their real condition; but, since I have come away, a friend has given me an interesting account, written by Judge Finn, who was imprisoned in the Castle for many months. I will extract such portions of it as will give you an idea of the prison, and of the wretched life led there by the prisoners.
...Mr. Finn was at one time Judge of the Superior Court in the city of New York, but before the war broke out removed to West Virginia, where he became State's Attorney. He was a thoroughly loyal man; and his strenuous opposition to the Rebellion having excited the hatred of the Rebel leaders, he was one night, early in 1864, kidnapped by a gang of ruffians, who bound him hand and foot, and conveyed him a prisoner to Richmond….he was taken to Castle Thunder, and - robbed of everything but the clothes he had on-was thrust into a filthy room, already occupied by half a score of half-starved men, ragged, and broken-spirited from long confinement.
The only furniture of this apartment was a splint broom, and a few shoddy blankets, alive with vermin. One of these blankets was furnished to each of the prisoners and it was made to serve for both seat and bed; the prisoner, during the day, sitting on it in the Turkish fashion, and at night wrapping it about him, and lying down on the floor, with a billet of wood for a pillow. The room was infested with rats, bed-bugs, and "gray-backs," - creatures which, at the South, grow to an enormous size, and are "more terrible than an army with banners."
They overran everything. An hour every morning was spent by all of the prisoners in searching their garments, and exterminating these detestable vermin; but often, when they supposed they had cast out the last intruder, the Rebel soldiers on the floor above would have a "hoe-down," and a copious shower would again come upon the heads of the hapless victims. A gray-haired man of seventy, his sight dimmed with age, spent hours every day in removing these creatures from his clothing; and a sick prisoner was almost devoured by them. He became very weak, and was removed to the hospital, and, on changing his clothing, a couple of negro servants with a stout broom brushed more than a pint of "gray-backs" from his person.
The food given the prisoners was of the poorest and most unwholesome description. From the time of the Judge's arrival until the latter part of May, they received only two meals daily. At eight o'clock in the morning a breakfast, consisting of only eight ounces of stale corn-bread, and a cup of cold water, was served up to them; and at two o'clock in the afternoon they were given for dinner another eight ounces of corn-bread, and a pint of swill; and this was all they received until they were furnished with the same kind of breakfast on the following day. This swill was made by putting a quart of cow-peas (a wild pea used at the South exclusively for feeding swine) into twelve quarts of water, and boiling it for an hour. Then it was served out in a pail so filthy as to be unfit for anything but a second-class pig-sty.
In the latter part of May the rations, though not increased in quantity, were somewhat improved in quality, the prisoners receiving four ounces of cornbread, one ounce of meal, and half a gill of rice twice a day, at the same hours as before. But the bread, a portion of the time, was made of cow-feed, - corn and cobs ground up together, and the meat, too, was often spoiled. The Judge has seen the cooks, in preparing fifty pounds of it for boiling, scrape off and take away eight quarts of maggots! As may be readily conceived, life on such fare was only an apprenticeship to starvation.
Every rat about the premises that could be caught was eaten. The Judge was told of this, and at first could not believe it; but one evening when he had wrapped himself in his blanket, and laid down to a troubled sleep, a prisoner in the adjoining apartment called to him for a little salt to season a fine rat he was roasting. The Judge hastened to the bars with the salt, and, sure enough, the man was cooking a large specimen over the jet of burning gas which illumined the dark apartment. When cooked, he salted and ate it, congratulating himself on being so fortunate as to have a "meat supper"! After that time the Judge saw hundreds of rats eagerly devoured by the starving inmates of the prison.
On another occasion a wealthy Pennsylvania farmer, who was captured by Stuart's raiders in the summer of 1862, and had been confined in the prison nearly two years, was seen to scrape the sawdust from one of the spittoons, mix it with water, and eat it with a spoon. When subsequently asked by his fellow prisoners why he had done this, he answered: "I was so crazed with hunger that I did not know what I was doing."
-------------------------
Daily Dispatch, Richmond VA.,
Monday Morning, April 11, 1864
Tragic - A tragic affair occurred at Castle Thunder last Friday morning about 7 o'clock. Some of the prisoners confined in the third story of the main building of the Castle, which fronts on Cary street, observing that the sentry on guard on the east end of the building was very youthful soldier and one not likely, from his appearance, to enforce rigidly the prison regulations, amused themselves blackguarding him, and one of them, bolder than the rest, persisted in putting his head out of the window in violation of a well understood regulation of the prison, and in spite of the sentry's repeated orders to withdraw it.
Alter exhausting remonstrance on him in vain the guard raised his musket and pointed It at the refractory prisoner. But still the latter, believing that the sentry had not the nerve to fire, refused to take In his head. The sentry fired. All the heads disappeared from the window.
The officer of the guard, attracted by the report of the musket, came out to see what was the matter. He found the youthful sentry quietly reloading his piece, and was informed by him what had occurred. The officer went up into the prison and there found Theodore V. Brandis lying dead on the floor, near the window, with a bullet through his bead. The ball had entered the centre of the forehead, just above the eyes, and crushed through the back of the skull. He had never spoken after he was shot, or moved except to tumble backward lifeless from the window.
At eleven o'clock an inquest was held by Coroner Sauxay, assisted by High Constable Freeman, and the Jury having examined the body, and heard the above recited facts, gave as their verdict that Theodore V. Brandis, the deceased, came to his death by a gunshot wound inflicted by a guard of the prison whilst the latter was in the discharge of his duty.
Brandis was 35 years of age, a native of New Jersey, but for some years bad been living in the town of Manchester, Chesterfield co., Va. About three weeks ago he and seven other conscripts, detailed as a guard at the Government Laboratory, deserted in the night and were attempting to reach the Yankee lines, when they were arrested on the Chickahominy and thrown Into Castle Thunder. The sentry who shot him is Robert H. Burford, of Appomattox, a member of co. D, 13th Va. battalion of artillery. He is not quite seventeen years of age, and is a quiet, gentlemanly young fellow, and said to be a first-rate soldier. This was the first time he ever was on guard at the Castle.
-------------------
The Soldier's Casket, Volume 1
Published 1865, Ch. W. Alexander
THE CASTLE THUNDER BLOODHOUND.
All of our readers have heard of the celebrated bloodhound which was captured as one of the appurtenances of that charnel house, Castle Thunder, at Richmond, when our gallant army took the capital of the Rebellion. His name is HERO, (it should have been NERO, after the human monster of Roman history,) and his size alone, to say nothing of his other attributes, is a curiosity. He stands nearly four feet high, is between seven and eight feet long, and weighs almost two hundred pounds Most beautifully proportioned, he joins the most enormous strength with great speed, while his huge mouth, garnished with corresponding tusks, would only require to be shown to a prisoner, to admonish him not to attempt to escape.
This tremendous brute can kill, in a short time, the most formidable bear pitted against him. He was carefully trained by his master, and has doubtless prevented the ultimate escape of many a poor Union prisoner. Hero is said to belong to the Russian breed, but we are informed by a gentleman thoroughly posted, that he is not pure, but an improved cross with another breed in the city of Ulm, resembling a wolf. The pure animal is not nearly so large.
Link to photo of HERO at Library of Congress: tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/pnp/ppmsca/54300/54...
-------------------
The Wilmington Journal.
Confederate States of America.
Wilmington, N. C., Saturday, Oct’r 24, 1863.
ESCAPE OF DESPERATE CHARACTERS FROM CASTLE THUNDER – A SENTINEL MURDERED.
On Thursday morning, between the hours of two and three o'clock, four men succeeded in effecting their escape from Castle Thunder. A previous attempt of the same parties having been discovered and frustrated by the vigilance of the officers, they were confined in the condemned cell, before which a guard is kept continually walking to and fro. and which, from its position, in the very centre of the building, was deemed the most secure place in the prison. Obtaining, by some means, the necessary tools, they cut through the floor into the commissary 's room beneath, descending into which, they secured the arms placed there for safe keeping, then in a body, rushing out into the room used for the reception of visitors, they overthrew the sentinel on guard inside the door, who being disabled by the fall, could not further arrest their flight.
They next encountered the sentinel in front of the prison, on Cary street. He happening to be immediately in their path, one of the number rushed upon him, and placing the muzzle of his gun close to the head of the guard, who in vain attempted to stop their egress, discharged the piece; the whole load entered the lower portion of the head, inflicting a frightful wound, and, of course, causing instant death. Three or four shots were fired in rapid succession at the fleeing murders, but with what success is not known.
A crowd of soldiers, on duty at the prison, were soon collected around the scene of this lamentable disaster. But here a singular incident occurred: -- the large dog (belonging to Captain Alexander, the commandant of the prison.) whom, doubtless, all have seen who have ever visited the Castle, took a position alongside the dead body and would permit no one to approach until the proper officers came up and relieved him of his charge; even then he followed the corpse into the building, seemingly determined to keep watchful guard over the remains until the last. This exhibition of affection tor the deceased soldier was truly touching and, indeed, remarkable.
The name of the deceased was Sutton Byrd, a private in Co. C, 53d North Carolina troops.
The names of the parties who committed this cold blooded murder are E. D. Boone, Edward Carney, Thomas Cole and John A. Chapman. The first is a noted ruffian, having made several escapes from different places, and was closely confined a few days ago for an attempted escape. The others were of a like character, being confined upon serious charges. Several recent attempts to break out by the last named parties had been discovered end frustrated by the officers.
The poor boy's father is here, and accompanies the remains to his home. Gen. Winder very properly and kindly ordered an escort to accompany the remains to the cars. When the lid of the coffin was about being placed on, the poor old father knelt down, and fixing his lips to the cold ones of his murdered boy, remained for some moments, apparently in prayer.
-------------------
Dispatch, Richmond VA., Monday Morning, November 16, 1863
Stampede from Castle Thunder - - Escape of Yankee Deserters -- Skillful Mining Operation.
Last Friday night, between forty and fifty Yankee deserters escaped from Castle Thunder by mining under the Northern wall of the Castle into a private lot, and escaping into Main street. The officers of the Castle, it seems, suspected that some of the prisoners were making an effort to mine out, and when the sentinels were posted that night each one was cautioned to vigilance, but especially those on the south side of Cary street.
The Castle, as our city readers will remember, fronts on the north side of Cary street, between 18th and 19th, and extends back to an alley about 15 feet wide, which is between Main and Cary streets. The miners, it seems, commenced their operations several days since, in the east end of the Castle, allotted to Federal deserters, there being about six hundred in that part of the building, and by working down near the north wall, and concealing the dirt under lot of old tobacco fixtures in their room, managed to escape detection.
Having the exact width of the alley, which was constantly paced by sentinels, they worked a subterranean passage under the wall and alley, and cutting an outlet-into a private yard, which was enclosed by high board fence, between forty and fifty of them escaped into the yard, and from thence through a private alley into Main street, before they were detected by one of the sentinels, who gave the alarm, rushed into the yard, and with the point of his bayonet put an end to the exodus of the departing Federals.
During Saturday and yesterday some few of the self-liberated prisoners were arrested, and it is not improbable that others of them may yet be picked up by our pickets and scouts.
Since writing the above we learn that the number who escaped was thirty-five, all of whom were Federal deserters but one, who was member of the 1st S. C. regiment. Of the thirty-five nineteen had been recaptured and returned to the Castle last night, and it was reported that five others were in custody of our cavalry, some twenty miles below the city.
-------------------
Daily intelligencer. Wheeling, VA., April 04, 1865
A Correspondent of the Washington Chronicle, who was confined six months at Castle Thunder, writes as follows of the condition of affairs lately at the rebel capital.
“In the hospital of Castle Thunder, in ward B in bed No. 45 lies an idiot boy, a Virginian, son of an aged widowed mother aged fifty years. This idiot is her last child. She had four, two fell at Fredericksburgh, and one at Gettysburgh. This idiot is now between seventeen and eighteen years old, and is to be shot next Tuesday for sleeping on his post. The boy is insane beyond all peradventure. The mother has no tie on earth but him. It is hard, but "discipline must be maintained an example must be made; and the idiot, not fit for a soldier, would do for an example." And what of the old mother? Judge Baxter, Confederate State Commissioner, says : "She'll be relieved of the charge, and the boy is fit for nothing else.” The boy's name is Nixon. More than 20 exchanged citizens now in our lines can witness to this. What on earth will Baxter be fit for when the Confederate State needs a Commissioner?
There is a cell in Richmond (Castle Thunder) known as cell No. 3. This cell is four feet eight inches high, McCool private in Harris' light dragoons, a man measuring six feet and half an inch, was put in the cell eleven months and a half….McCool had a ball and chain on his leg all the time, the ball weighing thirty-two pounds the chain ten pounds. The rain penetrates that cell, and on wet days McCool lay in the wet. Eleven months and a half passed, and he never once stood straight. He escaped five weeks since, through a hospital window. He had been transferred, sick.
************************
Red/Cyan (not red/blue) glasses of the proper density must be used to view 3D effect without ghosting. Anaglyph prepared using red cyan glasses from The Center For Civil War Photography / American Battlefield Trust. CCWP Link: www.civilwarphotography.org/
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
“Another legend in the area has artifacts marking its existence. This is the story of Black Jack and Pollie. In Kingman’s wild-and-wooly days, around the turn of the century or earlier, there was a saloon area that contained a red light district. Black Jack was a madame. She had a parrot named Pollie that accompanied her to the saloon she and her girls patronized. Soon, Pollie became as well known as her notorious owner. A teamster by the name of Whistlin’ Dick was fond of Black Jack and Pollie. He presented the madame with a stone bird he had carved to represent her pet. As with all pets, Pollie died. The entire saloon district mourned the loss of the parrot. It was finally decided Pollie would have a decent Christian burial. Of course, the real ladies in town did not appreciate the sentiment, but the revelers paid no heed. Whistlin’ Dick carved a tombstone for the small mascot. The Red Light girls dressed in their best finery. A long procession of mourners carried the small body from the saloon district to the cemetery, which is now the high school football field. In a remote corner, they buried Pollie. When the cemetery was moved, the small statue and tombstone were unearthed. It is said at certain times, when the conditions are right, Pollie’s happy squawk can faintly be heard in the area where she was buried.” – Mohave Miner, Oct. 31, 1989