View allAll Photos Tagged Tarshish
A wonderfully honest and dependable antiquities dealer with a superb reputation. Tarshish is the name of his shop.
Yafo, Israel - Jaffa (or Yafo) is one of the most ancient port cities in the world. It is mentioned four times in the Hebrew Bible, as one of the cities given to the Tribe of Dan (Book of Joshua 19:46), as port-of-entry for the cedars of Lebanon for Solomon's Temple (2 Chronicles 2:16), as the place whence the prophet Jonah embarked for Tarshish (Book of Jonah 1:3) and as port-of-entry for the cedars of Lebanon for the Second Temple of Jerusalem (Book of Ezra 3:7). It was also an important city in the Arab Middle East. During the Crusades, it was the County of Jaffa, a stronghold of the Kingdom of Jerusalem.
More photos of Israel.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooZzK6jJ9w8
Presenting the World Premier of the first (of many, I hope) motion picture of His Majesty,
"Tarshish - the Swan King"' in...
"Morning Song"
Dedicated to the Swan Dad in FernShade's care who took flight to heaven on May 13th, 2011.
He will forever be missed and remembered.
produced and directed by Jwray
Music by Johannes Brahms (Petite Etudes Op 91-10 in G Minor)
Archaeological evidence shows that Jaffa was inhabited since roughly 7,500 BC. Jaffa's natural harbor has been in use since the Bronze Age.
Jaffa is mentioned several times in the Bible: as one of the cities given to the Tribe of Dan (Book of Joshua 19:46); as port-of-entry for the cedars of Lebanon for Solomon's Temple (2 Chronicles 2:16); as the place whence the prophet Jonah embarked for Tarshish (Book of Jonah 1:3); as port-of-entry for the cedars of Lebanon for the Second Temple of Jerusalem (Book of Ezra 3:7); in the Book of Joshua as the territorial border of the Tribe of Dan, hence the nowadays term "Gush Dan", used for the center of the coastal plain; in the account of St. Peter's resurrection of the widow Tabitha (Acts, IX, 36-42) in Jaffa; and where Peter had here a vision in which God told him not to distinguish between Jews and Gentiles and to abolish the food ritual restrictions followed by then by the Jews (Acts, X, 10-16).
South chancel window by Frederick Preedy, c1862, and with its small, richly coloured scenes easily the most striking glass in the church. The window commemorates the family of Charles Augustus Hand who were drowned during a storm at sea in 1862. His father-in-law was then rector of this church and commissioned the window in memory of his daughter and her family. The images appropriately relate to their sacrifice at sea.
The church of St Peter at Willersley is a handsome cruciform building, which has evolved throughout the medieval period reaching it's present form in the 15th century when the attractive central tower was built.
Inside it is an intriguing sequence of intimate spaces, having no aisles except the rather cramped one on the north side of the nave. The crossing beneath the tower is especially beautiful, culminating in a vaulted ceiling (added in 1859). The chancel shows Victorian restoration but has some fetching glass.
The church is usually kept open and welcoming to visitors.
The square called A Rosa dos Ventos and located at the foot of the Tower of Hercules in A Coruña is one of the indisputable symbols of A Coruña since its construction in 1994. A Rosa dos Ventos represents the Celtic mythology of the North Atlantic Ocean. All the Celtic countries are represented in its quadrants: Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall, Brittany, Wales, Isle of Mann, and Galicia. This immense nautical rose that forms an authentic square at the foot of the Tower of Hercules, describes a circle 25 meters in diameter. Built as a mosaic, it is made of granite, slate and vitrified ceramic. Along with eight needles that indicate the cardinal points, it contains the symbols that identify the Celtic nations: the Scallop, Galicia; the Skull, Tarshish; the Clover, Ireland; the Thistle, Scotland; the Manx Triskelion, the Isle of Man; the Dragon, Wales; the Goblet, Cornwall; the Stoat, Brittany
The square called A Rosa dos Ventos and located at the foot of the Tower of Hercules in A Coruña is one of the indisputable symbols of A Coruña since its construction in 1994. A Rosa dos Ventos represents the Celtic mythology of the North Atlantic Ocean. All the Celtic countries are represented in its quadrants: Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall, Brittany, Wales, Isle of Mann, and Galicia. This immense nautical rose that forms an authentic square at the foot of the Tower of Hercules, describes a circle 25 meters in diameter. Built as a mosaic, it is made of granite, slate and vitrified ceramic. Along with eight needles that indicate the cardinal points, it contains the symbols that identify the Celtic nations: the Scallop, Galicia; the Skull, Tarshish; the Clover, Ireland; the Thistle, Scotland; the Manx Triskelion, the Isle of Man; the Dragon, Wales; the Goblet, Cornwall; the Stoat, Brittany
The square called A Rosa dos Ventos and located at the foot of the Tower of Hercules in A Coruña is one of the indisputable symbols of A Coruña since its construction in 1994. A Rosa dos Ventos represents the Celtic mythology of the North Atlantic Ocean. All the Celtic countries are represented in its quadrants: Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall, Brittany, Wales, Isle of Mann, and Galicia. This immense nautical rose that forms an authentic square at the foot of the Tower of Hercules, describes a circle 25 meters in diameter. Built as a mosaic, it is made of granite, slate and vitrified ceramic. Along with eight needles that indicate the cardinal points, it contains the symbols that identify the Celtic nations: the Scallop, Galicia; the Skull, Tarshish; the Clover, Ireland; the Thistle, Scotland; the Manx Triskelion, the Isle of Man; the Dragon, Wales; the Goblet, Cornwall; the Stoat, Brittany
According to the Bible, it was at the Jaffa Port that the Prophet Jonah Ben Amitai left for his journey to Tarshish in order to escape the mission that God gave him. On his way Jonah was swallowed by a "great fish" and survived inside of it for three days and nights. The fish eventually let Jonah go after God has relented to his pleas. And judging from the big smile on Ilana Goor’s Whale, it perhaps enjoyed the whole experience. (israeltraveler.org)
The square called A Rosa dos Ventos and located at the foot of the Tower of Hercules in A Coruña is one of the indisputable symbols of A Coruña since its construction in 1994. A Rosa dos Ventos represents the Celtic mythology of the North Atlantic Ocean. All the Celtic countries are represented in its quadrants: Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall, Brittany, Wales, Isle of Mann, and Galicia. This immense nautical rose that forms an authentic square at the foot of the Tower of Hercules, describes a circle 25 meters in diameter. Built as a mosaic, it is made of granite, slate and vitrified ceramic. Along with eight needles that indicate the cardinal points, it contains the symbols that identify the Celtic nations: the Scallop, Galicia; the Skull, Tarshish; the Clover, Ireland; the Thistle, Scotland; the Manx Triskelion, the Isle of Man; the Dragon, Wales; the Goblet, Cornwall; the Stoat, Brittany
The square called A Rosa dos Ventos and located at the foot of the Tower of Hercules in A Coruña is one of the indisputable symbols of A Coruña since its construction in 1994. A Rosa dos Ventos represents the Celtic mythology of the North Atlantic Ocean. All the Celtic countries are represented in its quadrants: Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall, Brittany, Wales, Isle of Mann, and Galicia. This immense nautical rose that forms an authentic square at the foot of the Tower of Hercules, describes a circle 25 meters in diameter. Built as a mosaic, it is made of granite, slate and vitrified ceramic. Along with eight needles that indicate the cardinal points, it contains the symbols that identify the Celtic nations: the Scallop, Galicia; the Skull, Tarshish; the Clover, Ireland; the Thistle, Scotland; the Manx Triskelion, the Isle of Man; the Dragon, Wales; the Goblet, Cornwall; the Stoat, Brittany
Built my first map in Photoshop. Depicts where Jonah as (Joppa), where he was sent (Nineveh), and where he actually went (Tarshish).
This is St.Peter's Church in Joppa (aka, Jaffa or Yafo)
Be sure to look at this picture in the "Original Size" setting.
Joppa (alt. Jaffa,Yafo) is part of the present day Israeli city of Tel Aviv. Located on the Mediterranean, it was a seaport even in ancient times. The earliest known reference to Joppa is found in inscriptions on the wall of Karnak temple in Egypt. In it, Thutmose III (ruled circa 1483 to 1450 B.C., sometimes written as Tuthmosis III) boasts of capturing a number of cities in Israel, including Joppa.
There are Old and New Testament references to Joppa...
Jonah 1:3 But Jonah ran away from the LORD and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Joppa, where he found a ship bound for that port. After paying the fare, he went aboard and sailed for Tarshish to flee from the LORD. (NIV)
Acts 9:36-43 Tells the story of the resurrection of Tabitha, aka Dorcas
Acts 10:5-6 Simon Peter stayed here with Simon the Tanner. Amazingly, excavations in Joppa have found that it was the site of a first century Roman era tannery. The artifacts that were found do not identify Simon, but it is not improbable that the location found could be his house.
St Botolph, Hevingham, Norfolk
A large church some way from its village. A good collection of 16th and 17th Century continental glass, and a quite remarkable set of 14th Century stalls.
Driving home today, I was passing the memorial Park and thought I would turn in just to see if I could find Tarshish..when I turned into the driveway I saw this big mound of white - he was on the green grass beside the small pool with his head under his wing, taking a nap in the sun. I quietly put my telephoto lens and crawled quietly out of my car, praying the whole time,
"Pls God, don't let him spook!!!!!"
He wasn't about to. This is a very confident creature. I came so close to him that my telephoto lens almost lost it's effectiveness - I had to back up a bit. He was bothered NOT AT ALL by my clicks and stupid sweet talk.
My first impression being this close - HE IS HUGE!!!!!! Oh My, but he is huge!!! And awesomely beautiful.
Isaiah 23:1
The burden of Tyre. Howl, ye ships of Tarshish; for it is laid waste, so that there is no house, no entering in: from the land of Chittim it is revealed to them
Jesaja 23:1
De last van Tyrus. Huilt, gij schepen van Tarsis! want zij is verwoest, dat er geen huis meer is, dat niemand er meer ingaat; uit het land Chittim is het aan hen openbaar geworden.
But Jonah rose to flee the Tarshish fro the presence of the Lord. - Jonah 1:3
Why do we run away from the One we should cling to?
Photo: © 2011 Chris Poldervaart † www.chrispoldervaart.com
I stopped on my way home to see Tarshish (pron. TAR-sheesh). I spoke to one of the grounds keepers about him..seems they had 2 for a long time then the female died..they don't know why. They are talking about getting another to replace her. I can see why they might not, if babies are born they might be subject to the same dangers as the Mom - animals, etc. It's near a wooded area. "Tartar" seems so friendly and content..hope he doesn't feel the loss of his mate.
This has a watercolor filter applied.
Jonah ran from God's command and instead went to Joppa where he boarded a ship to sail to Tarshish. Things did not go well for him...
This whimsical whale reminds us of this ancient story.
Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel.
May 15, 2015.
IMG_2560
From Portraits of the Nineties by E. T. Raymond (1921)
CHAPTER XXVI
CHARLES HADDON SPURGEON—WILLIAM BOOTH
I have remarked in another place that the man who takes his religion too seriously stands suspect of not quite believing in it. Those who are never troubled with doubts are prone to a wild hilarity which often exposes them to the charge of irreverence and coarse handling of sacred things. Since Nonconformity has widened, and new theologies have been propounded, it has become almost oppressively refined. When it was very narrow and dogmatic, and assured of itself, its chief exponents were often condemned as vulgar people. They were not really vulgar; they were only so much on terms with their belief that they could take liberties with it and all things.
Charles Haddon Spurgeon was a man of that type. He was an unlearned man, and if he had been learned it is not at all likely that he would have been a profound or exact thinker; it is much more probable that he would have been dulled into mere mediocrity. But if he did not know much of bookish things, he knew a good deal about things in general, and he knew (or thought he knew) absolutely one thing in particular, namely, that he was right in his conception of the purpose of Providence. It was this certitude, rather than any ingrained coarseness, that made him so boisterous and rollicking in his dealings with the most solemn subjects. He looked on “soul-saving” with the same sense of reality that a bricklayer looks on bricklaying, and he joked about[261] it as a bricklayer jokes when anything funny is suggested to him by an incident in his work.
Spurgeon did not survive long into the Nineties, but his influence did not altogether cease to count till the end of the decade. By the new century it was dying, and to-day it is dead—at any rate, so far as the high places of Nonconformity are concerned. The name Spurgeon is Dutch, and the great preacher was a Hollander in his remote origin; he descended from a refugee who came to this country to escape the Alva persecution. Spurgeon’s father was an Independent Minister, and he himself was “converted” by the Primitive Methodists, but at an early age he embraced the Baptist faith, and he preached as a Baptist his first sermon, delivered at sixteen, in a Cambridgeshire cottage. His family wished him to have some sort of “college” education, but he went his own way, believing then as always that practical work in “soul-saving” was more important than scholarship.
He was little more than a boy when he gained fame as a London preacher, addressing congregations of ten thousand at the Surrey Music Hall before the Metropolitan Tabernacle was built for him. His style was then very theatrical: a foreign scoffer remarked that his denunciations of the stage must have been prompted by jealousy, since he was himself so consummate an actor. In later years he relied less on meretricious effects and more on his essential earnestness, but to the end he took any liberties that occurred to him with his subject or his audience. In other respects he changed little or nothing. Through all the Darwinian controversy he remained unmoved by the arguments which flurried so many theological dovecotes. “Huxley and Darwin,” he would say, “can go to—their ancestors the monkeys,” and he would pause wickedly after the “to” for his congregation to titter. With the Higher Criticism, as[262] with evolution, he would have no truck whatever. But against the Church he had no particular feeling; he read the Anglican divines much as another man might read Confucius, thinking them curious and interesting people from whom something might be learned. To the students of the Camberwell College, indeed, he recommended a book of Anglican sermons. Its author, he said, had been a parson, still worse a bishop, but despite these grave disadvantages had been a worthy and able man. In later years he even withdrew from the Liberation Society, apparently because he felt that his fellow-Dissenters were on the whole readier than the Church to fall in with what he called “down-grade” tendencies in biblical criticism. For the same reason he even withdrew from the Baptist Union. “If,” he said, “you preach what is new, it will not be true; if you preach what is true, it will not be new.” For Rome, Spurgeon never pretended tolerance. When another Baptist owned that during a visit to France he had been present at the Mass, and “had never felt nearer the presence of God,” Spurgeon replied that it was a good illustration of the text, “If I make my bed in hell, behold, Thou art there.” It was, no doubt, his hatred of Rome that led him in 1886 to become a Liberal Unionist.
His Radicalism, however, had always been of a peculiar kind. He did not believe in “trusting the people,” since most of the people were miserable sinners. He was not a Pacifist. “Turn the other cheek,” he used to say, “but if that is smitten too, another law comes in; you must either go for your man or get away from him.” It was long, also—not, indeed, until he grew gouty—before he could be got to adhere to the teetotal movement, while he simply jeered at an anti-tobacco crusade. Spurgeon himself liked a good cigar; was in no way an ascetic; lived in style at Norwood, and used to drive to the[263] Tabernacle in a turnout which would have done credit to a stockbroker. On the other hand, he was the unrelenting foe of the theatre, and he denounced dancing as having cost the first Baptist his head. There was, indeed, in him a great deal more of the old hard-headed than of the new soft-hearted Puritan. His only departure from the seventeenth century was in the matter of his jocularity. It was natural with him—perhaps an inheritance from some jovial Hollander of the Jan Steen type—but it was also carefully cultivated. He kept an immense library of funny books to draw on for pulpit use, and was never more carelessly happy in the telling of a story than when he had studied it in all its bearings the night before. He never hesitated to use slang when it seemed to him effective; witness the following:
“It is always best to go where God sends you. Jonah thought he would go to Tarshish instead of Nineveh, but when the whale got hold of him he was sucked in.”
“Though you are teetotallers you must all come to your bier at last.”
“To some people Bible reading is like flea-catching; they pick up a thought here and there, hold it between finger and thumb, and then hop on somewhere else.”
“Seek to possess both unction and gumption.”
These sentences were addressed to candidates for the Baptist ministry. It is noteworthy that in such Spurgeon always assumed a lack of refinement—an assumption which would be hotly resented by the Nonconformist student of to-day. Especially irritating would be his advice never to drop an aspirate; to the importance of the initial “H” he was continually reverting. In deeper matters he was insistent on eternal punishment; to question hell was to question the Scripture. But he used to say that no doubt God would show “every consideration” to[264] those predestined to damnation—how he never explained in detail. He would have been very angry with feminism if it had been an important thing in his day; woman, he thought, should be kept in her place; and he despised the man who was swayed by his wife. He was fond of pointing out that most of the troubles of the Hebrew patriarchs could be traced to their too much marriage.
And the rest of the acts of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, the wideawake that he wore, the clerical coat that he would not wear, the puns and money that he made, the stones that he weighed, and the spiritual bread that he dispensed, the sermons that he preached, the 30,000 printed copies a week that he sold, the men that he knew, those that he consorted with, and those that he assailed mightily—are they not written in chronicles of Nonconformity? In due time Charles Haddon Spurgeon died, and was gathered to his fathers, and nobody reigned in his stead, and of the mighty house that he did not build nothing is written anywhere, for, with all his brightness and breeziness and firm faith and sturdiness and trite common sense, he lacked all the qualities that go to the building of anything but a reputation. He had a voice, and after that little.
GENERAL BOOTH.
(From a portrait by J. McLure Hamilton.)
But for just that which Spurgeon wanted William Booth would have been another Spurgeon. But to his faith and enthusiasm he joined something not at all common among religious enthusiasts in this country. His heart was a chaos of crude and uncontrolled emotionalism, but he had the head of a ruler. It is a common reproach against English Protestantism that it does not understand how to harness spiritual energy. Of that art William Booth was a master, and in more favouring circumstances he would probably have been included in the list of founders of mighty religious orders. It is tempting[265] to speculate what might have been the present position of the Salvation Army had Booth, who was brought up as a member of the Church of England, and had certainly no enmity to that Church, been encouraged to pursue his work within its communion. Left to himself, he was unable to provide his organisation with that firm philosophical basis which seems a necessary condition of permanence in a religious society. He could invent a hierarchy, but he had to borrow a theology; and the raggedness of his dogmatic formation was in pathetic contrast with the splendid “dressing” of his human cohorts. He could offer a dram to the spiritually fainting, but man cannot live by stimulants alone, and the Salvation Army had little more in the way of spiritual nutriment to offer those who began to hunger for something more solid. Its only expedient was to join the excitement of definite work to that of cloudy religion. The Army tended even in Booth’s lifetime to become more and more an organ of social endeavour and less and less a definitely Christian thing; it was in its lay and not in its religious character that it won during the Nineties the goodwill of countless excellent pagans, and was patronised by precisely the same sort of people who had at first assailed it as the blasphemous travesty of a sect.
“A bawling, fanatical, send-round-the-hatical, pick-up-the-pence old pair.” So were Booth and his devoted wife described by Truth in the early Eighties. Fifteen years later the old “General,” now a widower, was never mentioned in a reputable paper without profound respect. The inverted commas had long disappeared, and even Royalty condescended to compliment him on his fine work for the “submerged tenth.” But all this recognition was really a sign of failure. Or, to put the matter less crudely, it was a sign that the secondary object of the Army had become more important than its primary aim. Booth[266] had set out first of all to save men’s souls, and some people threw cabbage stalks at him, while others flung him jeers and slanders. The applause only came when it was evident that, with the incidental disadvantage of brass bands and a crazy vocabulary of enthusiasm, the Army was very useful for distributing soup and getting firewood chopped.
Booth proved how thin are the partitions dividing the excess of democracy from autocratic rule. His government was at first purely paternal. When the family got too large for his personal rule he had to delegate authority, but every officer whom he put in a position of trust was given plenary power to the extent of his commission. “Government by talk” he had tried and put aside. “This method of work,” he said, “will never shake the Kingdom of the Devil”; and so he adopted the military system. In this he was probably only following the suggestion of his own imperious nature. But if he had been actuated by the deepest craft he could hardly have hit on a more certain method of keeping his converts together. Men and women care a great deal less for liberty than for domination; they will accept most cheerfully subordination for themselves if it affords them a present chance or a sure prospect of exercising despotic sway over others. “From the moment,” says Booth, “of our adopting the simple method of responsible and individual commands and personal obedience our whole campaign partook of a new character; in place of the hesitation and almost total want of progress from which we have been suffering, every development of the work leaped forward.” The brass band, the flag, and the red jersey probably had comparatively little to do with the Army’s success. These were useful to attract attention, and may perhaps have allured some simple-minded and very unæsthetic people. But apart from the deeper spiritual elements, the main[267] point, I imagine, was the fascination of authority. Comfortable people, accustomed to deference throughout life, have little conception of the hunger for respect which reigns among those who seldom get it. Indeed, half our social troubles would be over if the “better” classes could grasp the simple fact that the “lower” classes are much more sensitive than themselves on all points of dignity. To a mere factory hand, man or woman—it was a novelty of the Army that it put the sexes from the first on an exactly equal footing—it was luxury to put off insignificance with the work-day clothes and put on importance with the Army uniform. In the Booth hierarchy there was room for the pride of the wretched and the ambition of the destitute.
It was the great talent of Booth to put to use the most unlikely things. His use of vulgarity was very characteristic. The vulgarity of some other popular preachers of the time was a natural emanation. But Booth was not naturally vulgar; no man could be with such a profile. He had really fine manners; to a king he would talk as if he were an old king himself; and there was never a suggestion in his intercourse with the greatest either of bumptiousness or servility. The vulgarity of his methods was of set purpose, like St. Francis’s hostility to worldly culture, and, though it was at once common form to inveigh against the coarse profanities of a Salvation Army meeting, I have found highly sensitive people far less repelled by their wildest extravagances than by the much more ordinary irreverence of the regulation “revivalist.” It might not be true to say that while others vulgarised sacred things Booth sanctified vulgarity. But it is true that, if one might sometimes smile at his audacities, they never made one shudder.
In other conditions, as I have said, Booth might have won immortality as a saint of the Church. In[268] still other circumstances he might have been a most considerable statesman. His Darkest England is much more than a philanthropic manifesto. The schemes outlined in it for dealing with unemployment by training and emigration are eminently wise and practical, and, if it is permissible to indulge a regret that his great qualities were not available for the Church, it may also be suggested that something was lost by the failure of politicians to make fuller use of his remarkable insight and experience concerning social problems. The inspiration on these matters gradually passed from him to the Webbs. It was not, probably, a change for the better. For though Booth was quite hard-headed in these concrete matters, he had also that wisdom of the heart in which Fabianism was deficient. He would say, and quite justly, in reply to those who argued that the Army attracted people too lazy for regular work, and actually created a class of unemployables, that John Jones was outside in the street, without work or food, and something must be done for him at once; it was useless to wait for a social revolution. But he was under no illusions as to the nature of existing society. “There are many vices,” he wrote, “and seven deadly sins; but of late years many of the seven have contrived to pass themselves off as virtues. Avarice, for instance, and Pride, when re-baptised Thrift and Self-Respect, have become the guardian angels of Christian Civilisation, and as for Envy, it is the corner-stone upon which much of our competitive system is founded.” Again: “I am a strong believer in co-operation, but it must be co-operation based on the spirit of benevolence. I don’t see how any pacific readjustment of the social and economic relations between classes in this country can be effected except by the gradual substitution of co-operative associations for the present wages system.” Assuredly the man who wrote these things was something more than a fanatic.
[269]
Booth’s decision with regard to his children’s education was most typical of the man. Certain friends offered to pay the expenses of a University training for his eldest son. No, said Booth; he should enlist in the Army at an early age, and go through the usual Salvation training. Booth was not stupid, and could have had none of the stupid man’s contempt for education. But he seemed to be a little afraid of it, and from his own point of view who can say he had not reason? In the same spirit the Churchmen of the Renaissance fought against the teaching of Greek, not because they were all fools, but because some of them foresaw the dangers that actually followed. Booth was perhaps not wrong in suspecting that the higher education of his time, while making a man cocksure about things now debatable or disproved, would tend to make him dubious or indifferent about things which in his view permitted neither of incertitude nor of lukewarmness.
But if he hoped thus to secure to the thing he had made the vitality he had temporarily imparted to it, the hope was doomed to be disappointed. It could hardly be fulfilled, in any case, if the Army was to continue in isolation; for the Army was an order rather than a sect, with a discipline rather than a creed, and in the absence of its creator’s inspiration its tendency must have been to harden into formalism. That process had, indeed, begun even before the General’s death. It was suggested above that during the Nineties the Salvation Army was wounded by kindness. In the days of its persecution it was at least free; it had the feeling that it might just as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb. But when the suburbs threw bouquets instead of stones the Salvationists found that the respect of the respectable is a chain. They were henceforth fettered. They could expand, but they could not change. The[270] movement was canalised and stereotyped; it had won recognition as a useful social adjunct, and it had to live up to its reputation. It became static in everything but its statistics. Gradually its tunes have grown old-fashioned; its uniforms are one with the tight military trouser and the bustled skirt; the War Cry is as definitely a paper with a past as Reynolds’s or the Referee. In its way the Army, no doubt, does as much good as ever. But the limits of that good are known. And it keeps nobody awake at night thinking of what might happen with the ferment of a revolutionary Christianity working among the English poor.
Booth was a great man of his kind—greater far than most of the Right Honourables and Right Reverends of his day—and it was a mighty thing that he built from defaced stones and nameless rubble rejected by all others. But he was too honest to fabricate a new religion, and a religious order implies a Church to order it.
Jonah disobeyed God and went to Jaffa instead of Nineveh. While sailing to Tarshish, he was thrown overboard and swallowed by a whale.
Jonah disobeyed God and went to Jaffa instead of Nineveh. While sailing to Tarshish, he was thrown overboard and swallowed by a whale.
From left to right: Uncle Eljulius Ever, Tarshish Ever, Lawrence Haliburton, Adele Haliburton, Elnora Lyons Ever, and Berta Ever
St Botolph, Hevingham, Norfolk
A large church some way from its village. A good collection of 16th and 17th Century continental glass, and a quite remarkable set of 14th Century stalls.
After three long flights, the pilgrims are finally in the Holy Land. Dennis & Bill leaving our bus and entering the ancient city of Jaffa! Jaffa has one of the oldest functioning harbors in the world, and it is the port where Jonah came when fleeing from the Lord to Tarshish.
I suspect this is an interpretation of Cetus, the sea monster Andromeda was being sacrificed to. Other legends about Jaffa (often under the name Joppa in the Bible) are that Jonah caught a boat here headed for Tarshish before a storm came up and he made the sailors throw him into the sea where he was swallowed but not digested; the cedars from Lebanon to build both temples in Jerusalem came through here; and Peter in the New Testament brought a girl named Tabitha back to life on a rooftop here, after which he had a vision of a heavenly tablecloth loaded with forbidden foods, symbolic of how God wanted him to baptize gentiles.
From left, Jordi Chervitz, Esther Tarshish and Max Clarkson make challah during a workshop. Profits from the sale of the bread will be donated to the Lawrence Community Shelter and Just Food. Photo by John Young. See it on LJWorld.com: www2.ljworld.com/photos/2011/oct/23/223383/
For the king's ships went to Tarshish with the servants of Huram: every three years once came the ships of Tarshish bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
2 Chronicles 9:21
King James Version
“The #word of the #Lord came to Jonah son of Amittai: “Go to the great city of Nineveh and #preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.” But Jonah ran away from the Lord and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Joppa, where he found a #ship bound for that port. After paying the fare, he went aboard and #sailed for Tarshish to flee from the Lord. Then the Lord sent a great #wind on the sea, and such a #violent #storm arose that the ship threatened to break up. All the #sailors were afraid and each cried out to his own god. And they threw the #cargo into the sea to lighten the ship. But Jonah had gone below deck, where he lay down and fell into a deep sleep. The #captain went to him and said, “How can you sleep? Get up and call on your god! Maybe he will take notice of us so that we will not perish.” Then the sailors said to each other, “Come, let us cast lots to find out who is #responsible for this calamity.” They cast lots and the lot fell on Jonah. So they asked him, “Tell us, who is responsible for making all this #trouble for us? What kind of work do you do? Where do you come from? What is your country? From what people are you?” He answered, “I am a #Hebrew and I #worship the #Lord , the #God of heaven, who made the #sea and the dry land.” This terrified them and they asked, “What have you done?” (They knew he was #running away from the Lord, because he had already told them so.)” #Jonah 1:1-10 #NIV ift.tt/2d44hmh #booksofthebible #biblequotes #biblestudy #bibleverses #biblejournaling #bible #bibleverse #bibles ift.tt/2cwlpvY
St Chrysostom, Victoria Park, Manchester, 1874-77.
Anson Chapel - East Window - detail.
The kings of Tarshish, of the isles shall bring presents.
By Burlison & Grylls, 1906.
The firm of Burlison & Grylls was founded in 1868 at the instigation of the architects George Frederick Bodley and Thomas Garner.
Thomas John Grylls (1845-1913) and John Burlison (1843-1891) were encouraged to leave their apprenticeships with Clayton & Bell and set up their stained glass firm which built a considerable reputation for its fine work over the next 40 years. They became one of the most successful stained glass firms in England.
Following Thomas John Grylls' death in 1913, the firm was continued by his son Thomas Henry Grylls (1873-1953), although effectively it can be said to have closed shortly after its London premises were bombed and all records destroyed in 1945.