View allAll Photos Tagged knowledge
The Thirty-Eighth Session of WIPO's Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC) took place in Geneva, Switzerland from December 10 to December 14, 2018.
Copyright: WIPO. Photo: Emmanuel Berrod. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 IGO License.
Knowledge Economy Report launch "Transforming Arab Economies: Traveling the Knowledge and Innovation Road" at ISESCO headquarters in Rabat, Morocco. Photo: Ibrahim Ajaja / World Bank / CMI.
The Knowledge City would be virtually an extension of Hitec City in Character and business. APIC will auction lands for development of IT/ITES/BPO, Commercial, Hospitality and even Retail use.
Once the legal hurdles are cleared, the development here will result in transformation of the stretch of land between Whisper Valley Junction and Guchibowli Junction. At the moment there are no shops or super markets along the road. But this stretch will develop into major commercial street similar to Madhapur and will cater to requirements of people living in Residential Complexes of L&T, IVRCL and several upcoming ventures at Guchibowli.
Farmers and experts share knowledge and experiences on vegetable production in Hoima, Uganda.
Photo: R. Vernooy (Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT)
painting showing that the holy quran is a light which will light us to the right path and guide us to heaven.
Part of the Philadelphia Mural Arts Program
Title: Tree of Knowledge
Location: 1301 MARKET ST
Completed On: 10/1/2003
Artist(s): Senft, Brian; Webb, Michael; Gray, David; Bader, Jared; Buss, Jonny; Johnson, Diego
SUC56360.jpg taken Philadelphia, PA June 2008
"Professor, please tell us more about the Great Solar System!". The professor also adds that science, education and knowledge will lead to peace, emphasized by a dove landing on his hand!
Guns and Gun Parts. Steel engraving from The National Encyclopedia 1884 - A Dictionary of Universal Knowledge.
Published by William Mackenzie, London; 18 Vols. Brown gilt cloth boards 20cm x 17cm.
Zag - bit.ly/1yubJ8G
Photo by Eric Ziegler
More and more companies are building social networks in the enterprise. For those keeping track, the common term used today is Enterprise Social Networks (ESN).In almost all cases, the reasoning for implementing an ESN is to improve collaboration, break down silos, ease the flow information, etc. One that is often missing is how it could influence search results in the enterprise.
In the internet, social networks play a huge role in helping with search results. This help does not come in the straight up indexing of the content and adding to the overwhelming amount of content already being indexed, but rather from the building a a social or knowledge graph from the social networks.
Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. have built algorithms to mine the content in social networks and to try to understand the relationships between the interactions happening in the social networks. While this information is used for many purposes, the mining of the data is used build out what is called a social graph and to extend knowledge graphs (think really big taxonomies or ontologies).
There is a big opportunity for companies to leverage their ESN implementations to improve their search results. This concept goes beyond the idea of ESN and could even be applied to any location people interact with each other (online meetings, Chat sessions, even corporate email).
By mining the information from these interactions, a social graph of related to topics and concepts can be built, that will improve how people search and eventually find the information they are most interested in.This note was inspired +David Amerland book, Google Semantic Search - Amazon location 2111.
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]
A small sample of some of the books I've read on varying subjects. Got to be done. The subjects include 1980s British politics, Richard Nixon, Third Reich, Communism, Johnny Cash, HST trains, Japan WW2, Manic Street Preachers, Philosopy, Humanity a moral understanding of the 20th Century (Fascinating book) Rise & Fall of the labour party & the war in Iraq & the lies that surround it.
Trying new genre of street photography inspired by James Yeung and Jeff Krol.
You can find their photos at the link below:
www.flickr.com/photos/jeffkrol/
www.flickr.com/photos/jamesyeung/
Find me at: www.snapby.me
www.efactor.com/p/events/id=71
Attend all of our events for Free when you upgrade to Knowledge Class.
www.efactor.com/p/package_knowledge
SEE ALL EVENTS HERE:
www.efactor.com/p/events/id=71
Attend all of our events for Free when you upgrade to Knowledge Class.
www.efactor.com/p/package_knowledge
SEE ALL EVENTS HERE:
www.efactor.com/p/events/id=71
Attend all of our events for Free when you upgrade to Knowledge Class.
www.efactor.com/p/package_knowledge
SEE ALL EVENTS HERE:
Sgt. Jerry Selby is tested on his knowledge of disassembling and reassembling the MK-19. This was the first test administered at the Wyoming Army National Guard’s Best Warrior Competition held at the Camp Guernsey Joint Training Center in Guernsey, Wyo., April 8, 2021. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Cpl. Kristina Kranz)
8 volume 1936 edition of "Newnes' Pictorial Knowledge An Educational Treasury And Children's Dictionary" edited by HA Pollock (main editor) Enid Blyton (associate editor), AC Marshall (Technical Editor) and AHJ Humphreys (art editor). There are 10 volume editions around as well with different editorial staff (RH Poole, Peter Finch, Enid Blyton).
This is the third tome I have visited St Vncent: first time I found it locked, or more likely did not push the door hard enough, second time I did go inside but only took a handful of shots. So this time, it means a lot of snapping.
Both this and Wingham were among the first churches I visited in this project, and with years of accumulated knowledge a return is always good to see what you missed the first, and second time.
As it turned out, I could not find the church. It is signposted off the main road, then nothing. We were two miles in the country before I found a place to turn round, but a check of the county map and we turned back to the village and found it on Church lane, of course.
Littlebourne is another village and church on the banks of the Nailbourne, a winterbourne, that flows through here to Bridge, eventually to Barham. Downstream it turns quickly into the Little Stour which in turn flows into the Great Stour at Plucks Gutter.
The view from the south is limited due to mature trees, but from the north reveals several periods of buildings with rooflines at different angles and heights.
-----------------------------------------
The villages 13th century church, St Vincent of Saragossa, is thought to have been founded by the monks of St Augustine's Abbey in Canterbury and contains an ancient wall painting depicting Saint Christopher, patron saint of travellers. The church also has what is reckoned to be one of the finest collection of stained glass windows designed by Nathaniel Westlake in the country. Nathaniel Westlake was a leading designer of the Gothic Revival movement in England.
Work done in 1995 by experts from the V&A Museum established that he designed each of the windows over the long period of his work with the Company, thus giving an outstanding example of the development of his style.
The Church has a six-bell peal, the oldest bell dating back to 1597, the newest 1899.
www.littlebournebenefice.org.uk/littlebournechurchhistory...
-----------------------------------------
LOCATION: Situated at about 40 feet above O.D. on Head brickearth (over Upper Chalk). A little to the west of the river Little Stour. Littlebourne Court, originally belonging to St. Augustine’s Abbey, lies immediately to the north-west. Wickhambreaux and Ickham churches are not far away to the north and east.
DESCRIPTION: As with many North-East Kent churches, this church points south-east, and it is first documented in Domesday Book, with the eastern three-quarters of the nave of the present church presumably being, in part, of an early Norman date. The only visible evidence for the earliest structure, however, is outside the south-west corner of the nave. Here one can see reused Roman bricks, and the original steep slope of the very early 13th century south aisle (continuing the line of the nave roof). The nave must be earlier than this, so is at least 12th century in date. It is also worth noting the very rare dedication, to St Vincent.
The whole of the south arcade for the south aisle still survives in its very early 13th century form, with four pointed arches (that on the west is smaller). The arches have continuous flat
the piers themselves. All the dressings are in Caen stone.
Later in the 13th century a large new chancel was built, probably at about the time (c. 1245) when St Augustine’s Abbey were endowing the new vicarage there, after the appropriation. The chancel has four tall lancets on either side, and an eastern triplet which has internal shafting on the jambs, and deeply moulded rere-arches and hood-moulds. All the other lancets have plain rere-arches, and all the chancel windows sit internally on a filleted roll-moulding which steps up at the east end and runs under the triplet. There is a piscina on the south-east with a pointed arch (with hood) over it, and bar-stopped chamfers on the sides. On the north-west side of the chancel is a small doorway, which was restored in the 19th century. The chancel was fairly heavily restored on the outside in the 19th century (‘1865’ on one of the rain-water hoppers), but much of its original coursed whole flints are still visible, as well as some of the rows of putlog holes. The chancel also has a separate roof, with a west gable, but this was rebuilt completely in c. 1865.
At about the same time as the chancel was being rebuilt in the early to mid-15th century, a very plain tower was added at the west end (It is similar to the neighbouring tower at Ickham). This has a tall simple pointed arch (with flat chamfers and abaci) into the nave, and on the west is a simple pointed doorway with flat chamfers and a tall lancet above it. The tower is unbuttressed, and has four more wide restored lancets (one in each face) in the top (belfry) stage. Externally the tower has the remains of its original plastering over coursed flint with side-alternate Caenstone quoins. On top of the tower is a later medieval (14th/15th century) brooch spire (now covered in slates).
The tower was restored in 1899, and the bells were rehung in a new timber and cast iron frame. There are now six bells, dated 1597,1610, 1650 and three of 1899 (said to have been recast from two late medieval ones). Glynne tells us that there was an organ in a west gallery under the tower, but this was removed during the restoration. A shed (now 2 cloakrooms) was also added to the north side of the tower in c. 1899.
A small Lady Chapel may have been added to the north-east side of the nave in the later 13th century as shown by its two light trefoil-headed (with circular opening above) east window (it has an internal rere-arch). All other evidence for this above ground was removed by the early 14th and early 19th century re-buildings (see below). The Lady Chapel is first documented in the late 15th century, but most churches acquired a separate Lady Chapel in N.W. Kent in the 13th century.
In the early 14th century both the south and north aisles had their outer walls rebuilt. On the south this was a continuous heightening and rebuild for the full length of the nave (with the evidence for the earlier lean-to aisle surviving in the west wall, as shown above). There is however still a later 13th century lancet in the centre of the south wall, with a probable later 13th century south doorway next to it (though completely rebuilt externally in the 19th century). The other aisle windows are all, however, 2 - light early 14th century traceried windows, and the gables and separate pitched roof over the aisle is also perhaps 14th century (it is still hidden under a flat plaster ceiling). In the south aisle wall are some reused Reigate stone fragments, and the large later south buttress has Ragstone quoins and reused Reigate And Caenstone fragments (and heavy 19th century knapped flintwork). Some Purbeck marble is reused in the wall west of the south porch. This aisle also has a small square-topped piscina in its south-east corner, and a very small stoup just inside the door on the east.
Hasted tells us that ‘a few years ago the north isle fell down, when there were some curious paintings discovered by the breaking of the plaster from the walls. This aisle was immediately rebuilt’. It is however, clear from the present remains (and from the Petrie water-colour view), that the church was again rebuilt in the early 19th century, with the present flatish 4-bay crown/king post nave roof and lath and plaster ceiling. The two dormers on the south side of the nave roof are presumably of the same date as is the shallow-pitched shed-roof over the north aisle, and the wooden post and two semi-circular arches into the north aisle. On the north-west side of the nave one can see an infilled pointed arch (? of chalk) with abaci, suggesting that there was originally a 13th century 3-bay north aisle (and Lady Chapel). The scar for the south-west corner of this aisle which did not continue to the west end of the nave, is just visible, and the late 18th century collapse was clearly at the west end of this aisle, which was not rebuilt (the other aisle-wall window being reset in the nave wall). The north wall of the north aisle must have been rebuilt in the early 14th century with buttresses and new two-light traceried windows. There may have been a north door here.
Only the chancel was heavily restored in the later 19th century (1865) with a new south porch in 1896, replacing a brick one, according to Glynne. A porch is documented from at least 1505.
BUILDING MATERIALS: (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles etc.):
The main local material is flint, and whole flints, in courses, are used for all the early work with dressings of Caenstone. Some Reigate stone is then used in the 13th century, with Kent Rag for the quoins in the early 14th century. There is also some reused Purbeck marble in the walls, and Bathstone is used for the late 19th century restorations. Hasted mentions ‘the remains of good painted glass’ in the chancel side lancets and ‘seven sacraments, etc. handsomely done, with rich borders’ in the eastern lancets, ‘but they have been some few years since removed’ (op. cit. below, p.155). Also he mentions armorial glass in the S.E. window of the south aisle, and other now-vanished glass is known from the church - see C.R. Councer (below).
EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH: None, but remains of medieval wall-painting on the north side of the nave, at the west end. Also a leger slab, with a small brass inscription in it, dated 1585, in front of the chancel arch. Also some early 19th century Benefaction boards on the west wall of the south aisle. Most of the furnishings in the church date from the restoration of 1864-4, or later.
CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS:
Size & Shape: Large north-south rectangular area around church, with large extensions to north (20th century) and south (19th century).
Condition: Good
Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lych Gate of timber (1892) to the south. Very large c. early 14th century great barn of Littlebourne Court (172ft long) runs along west boundary of the churchyard.
Ecological potential: ? Yes. The burial under a ‘great palm’ (ie. Yew Tree) in the churchyard is mentioned in a will of 1542, and there are still some quite large Yews north of the church.
Late med. Status: Vicarage endowed in 1245 with a house, some tithes, etc. A chaplain had to be found to celebrate weekly in Garrington Chapel.
Patron: St. Augstine’s Abbey, Canterbury (and alienated to the Italian monastery of Monte Mirteto in Italy, 1224). In 1538 it went to the crown, and then on to the Dean and Chapter of Canterbury in 1541.
Other documentary sources: Hasted IX (1800) , 155-8. There is much documentation in Thorne’s Chronicle and the ‘Black Book’ of St Augustine’s. Testamenta Cantiana (E. Kent, 1907), 196-8 mentions burial in the churchyard from 1473, the church porch (1501), various ‘lights’, the altar of Our Lady (1499+), reparation of the altars of St James and St Nicholas (1473), for paving between the chancel and the west door (1419).
SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS:
Inside present church: ? Good.
Outside present church: ? Good, though there is a large soil build-up around the church, and a brick-lined drainage gulley (up to 2ft deep) has been made all around the church.
RECENT DISTURBANCES/ALTERATIONS:
To structure: None, but chancel stalls brought from St Johns, Herne Bay in 1974, and organ in north aisle from Holy Cross, Canterbury in 1972.
To floors: Brick floor relaid at east end of S. aisle - Oct 1991.
Quinquennial inspection (date/architect): Feb. 1990 Maureen O’Connor.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT:
A Norman nave was given a lean-to south aisle and perhaps extended to the west in the very early 13th century, with a plain west tower being added soon after. The chancel was rebuilt (and greatly enlarged) in the mid 13th century, and there was probably also a Lady Chapel and nave north aisle by the later 13th century. The outer walls of the aisles were rebuilt in the early 14th century. A timber spire was also built. In the late 18th century the west end of the north aisle collapsed and this was rebuilt along with the nave roof, etc. again in the early 19th century. Chancel restored in 1865, and west tower in 1899 (with rehung bells). A new south porch was built in 1896.
The wider context: One of a group of churches belonging to St Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury with major rebuildings in the 13th and early 14th centuries.
REFERENCES: S.R. Glynne, Notes of the Churches of Kent (1877), 167-8. (He visited in 1851). C.R. Councer, Lost Glass from Kent Churches ) (1980), 77-8.
Guide Book: None available in church, but see St Vincent’s Church, Littlebourne by Elizabeth Jeffries (1984) - very poor for architectural history.
Plans & drawings: Petrie early 19th cent. view from N.E., with continuous roof slope over nave and N. aisle.
DATES VISITED: 19th December 1996 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown
www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/LIT.htm
------------------------------------------
LITTLEBORNE
LIES the next parish south-eastward from Stodmarsh, taking its name from its situation close to the stream which bounds the eastern part of it, and at the same time to distinguish it from the other parishes of the name of Borne in the near neighbourhood of it.
There is but one borough in this parish, called the borough of Littleborne.
Littleborne extends to the skirt of the beautiful and healthy parts of East Kent, and verging farther from the large levels of marsh land which lie near the Stour, quits that gloomy aspect of ill health so prevalent near them, and here begins to assume one more cheerful, pleasant and healthy; and Twyne tells us, (fn. 1) that it was allotted by the abbot and convent of St. Augustine's, who possessed the manor, for the plantation of vines. The village is built on the high road leading from Canterbury to Sandwich and Deal, at the eastern boundary of the parish, adjoinining to the Little Stour, and consists of about forty houses. The church stands at a small distance from it, having the courtlodge close to it, with the parsonage at a small distance. This parish extends northward as far as the Stour, opposite to Westbere, in which part of it however, there is but a small quantity of marsh-land, near which is an estate called Higham, which antiently was owned by a family of that name. Above the hill, south-eastward from hence, there is a great deal of woodland, and among it a tract of heathy rough land, belonging to the archbishop, called Fishpool-downs, through which the road leads to Wickham. At the bottom of Fishpool hill is the valley called the Ponds, now entirely covered with wood, part of which is in this parish. The ponds were supplied from a spring called Arrianes well, probably for Adrian's well, and were of a considerable size and depth, made for the supply of the convent of St. Augustine, the owners of them, with fish for their refectory, the sides of them now equally thick with coppice wood, were antiently a vineyard. These woods continue from hence adjoining the high road towards the village in great quantities, much of which belongs to the archbishop, and are intermixed with a great deal of rough bushy ground. The lands in this parish are in general very poor and gravelly, but towards Wickham they are much more fertile both for corn and hops, of which there are several plantations. This parish extends across the river eastward towards the hill, and takes in great part of Lower Garwinton, and part of the house, and some little land of Upper Garwinton within it, which is entirely separated from the rest of it by the parish of Adisham intervening.
Polygonatum scalacæci, Solomon's seal; grows plentifully on Fishpool-hill in this parish.
A fair is held here on the 5th of July, for toys and pedlary.
In the year 690, Widred, king of Kent, gave to the monastery of St. Augustine, in pure and perpetual alms, five plough-lands called Litleborne, on condition of their remembring of him in their prayers and solemn masses. And in the year 1047, king Edward the Consessor gave another plough-land here, which consisted of the estates of Bourne, Dene, and Wiliyington, to archbishop Eadsin, free from all service, except. the trinoda necessitas, and he bestowed it on that monastery. After which the manor of Little borne continued in the possession of the abbey to the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered under the general title of the land of the church of St. Augustine:
In Dunamesfort hundred, the abbot himself holds, Liteburne, which is taxed at seven sulings. The arable land is twelve carucates. In demesne there are three carucates, and thirty-five villeins, with fourteen cottagers having six and an half. There is a church, and thirtyeight acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of four hogs. In the time of king Edward the Consessor it was worth twenty-five pounds, afterwards twenty pounds, now thirty-two pounds. Of this manor the bishop of Baieux has in his park, as much as is worth sixty shillings.
After this the abbot and convent's possessions here were increased by several gifts and purchases of different parcels of land. (fn. 2)
King Henry III. in his 54th year, granted to the abbot and convent free-warren in all their demesne lands of Littleborne, among others. In the 7th year of king Edward II.'s reign, anno 1313, in the iter of H. de Stanton and his sociates, justices itinerant, the abbot, upon a quo warranto, claimed and was allowed in this manor among others, free warren in all his demesne lands of it, and view of frank-pledge, and other liberties therein-mentioned, in like manner as has been already mentioned before, in the description of the manors of Sturry and Stodmarsh. (fn. 3) By a register of the monastery of about this time, it appears, that this manor had then in demesne the park of Trendesle. In the 10th year of king Edward III. Solomon de Ripple being custos, or bailiff of this manor, made many improvements here, and purchased more lands in it, all the buildings of it being in a manner wholly re-built and raised from the ground, with much cost, by him. In king Richard II.'s reign, the abbot's manor of Littleborne was valued at 23l. 8s. 6d. the admeasurement of the lands being 505 acres. After which this manor continued with the monastery till its dissolution, anno 30 Henry VIII. when it came into the king's hands, and remained in the crown till king Edward VI. in his 1st year, granted the manor and manor-house, with all lands and appurtenances, and a water-mill lately belonging to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine, to the archbishop, among other premises, in exchange for the manor of Mayfield, &c. parcel of the possessions of whose see it still remains, the archbishop being the present owner of it. The manor, with the profits of courts, royalties, &c. the archbishop keeps in his own hands; but the demesnes have been from time to time demised on a beneficial lease. The family of Denne have been for more than a century lessees of it, who now reside in the court-lodge.
On the abolition of episcopacy, after the death of king Charles I. this manor was sold by the state to Sir John Roberts and John Cogan, the latter of whom, by his will in 1657, gave his moiety of it to the mayor and aldermen of Canterbury, for the benefit of six poor ministers widows (for whose use he had at the same time demised his dwelling-house in Canterbury, now called Cogan's hospital. But the manor of Littleborne, on the restoration in 1660, returned again to the see of Canterbury.
The manor of Wolton, alias Walton, lies in the southern part of this parish, adjoining to the precinct of Well, and was antiently possessed by a family who took their name from it, one of whom, John, son of John de Wolton, held it at the latter end of king Henry III.'s reign. But this family became extinct here before the reign of king Edward III. in the 20th year of which, Roger de Garwinton held it by knight's service, (fn. 4) in whose descendants it continued till it passed into the family of Petit, of Shalmsford, who held it of the abbot of St. Augustine's by the like service, in which name and family it continued till it was at length alienated to Sir Henry Palmer, of Bekesborne, whose descendant of the same name passed it away by sale to Sir Robert Hales, of Bekesborne, in whose descendants it continued down to Sir Philip Hales, bart. of Howlets, who in 1787 alienated this manor to Isaac Baugh, esq. of Well, the present owner of it.
Wingate, alias Lower Garwington, in a manor, which lies on the other or eastern side of the river, adjoining to Ickham, taking the former of those names from a family, who were owners of it in Henry III.'s reign, and held it by knight's service of the abbot and convent of St. Augustine. In which reign Simon de Wingate held it as above-mentioned, but before the 20th year of King Edward III. this name was extinct here, and Thomas de Garwinton then held this estate, lying in Wingate, held of the abbot by the like tenure. (fn. 5) In the descendants of Thomas de Garwington, who resided at their mansion and manor, since called Upper Garwinton, adjoining to it, seems to have continued some time, and from them, as well as to distinguish it from that, to have taken the name of Wingate, alias Lower Garwinton. After this family had quitted the possession of it, the Clyffords appear from different records to have become owners of it, and after them the Sandfords, and it appears by the escheat rolls, that Humphrey Sandford died possessed of it in the 14th year of king Henry VII. and that Thomas Sandford was his son and heir. After which it came into the hands of the crown, for king Henry VIII. in his 30th year, granted the manors of Wingate and Garwinton to Sir Christopher Hales, then master of the rolls. He left three daughters his coheirs, who became jointly, entitled to it, and on the division of their estates it was allotted to the youngest daughter Mary, who entitled her husband Alexander Colepeper, esq. to it, in which name it continued till the 22d of queen Elizabeth, when it was passed away by sale to Thomas Fane, esq. whose son Francis, earl of Westmoreland, sold it to William Prude, alias Proude, esq. who being a lieutenant-colonel in the army, was slain at the siege of Maestricht in 1632, having devised this estate in tail male to his eldest surviving son Serles Prude, who died in 1642, leaving only two daughters his coheirs, upon which it came to his next brother William, who left an only daughter Dorothy, and she, the entail being barred, carried it first in marriage to Nethersole, by whom she had no issue, and secondly to Christopher May, esq. of Rawmere, in Suffex, whose only daughter and heir Anne, entitled her husband William Broadnax, esq. of Godmersham, to the possession of it. His son Thomas Changed his name, first to May and then to Knight, and died possessed of this manor in 1781, leaving an only son Thomas Knight, esq. of Godmersham, who in the year 1785 exchanged it for other lands in Crundal with Thomas Barret, esq. of Lee, the present owner of it.
Upper Garwinton is a manor, which lies adjoining to that last-described, southward, at the boundary of this parish, next to Adisham, in which parish part of the mansion of it stands, being written in the survery of Domesday, Warwintone, one of the many instances in that book of the mistakes of the Norman scribes. It was, after the conquest, parcel of those possessions with which the Conqueror enriched his half-brother Odo, the great bishop of Baieux and earl of Kent, and was exchanged by him for other lands with the abbot of St. Augustine's, accordingly it is thus entered in that record, under the general title of the land of the church of St. Augustine:
The abbot himself holds Warwintone, and the bishop of Baieux gave it to him in exchange of his park. It was taxed at half a suling and forty-two acres of land. The arable land is one carucate, and there is in demesne, with three cottagers, and sixteen acres of meadow. In the time of king Edward the Confessor it was worth four pounds, and afterwards forty shillings, now four pounds. This manor Edric de Sbern Biga held, and now Radulf holds it of the abbot.
Whether this description extended to the last-described manor of Wingate, is uncertain, though most probably, as both were held of the abbot by knight's service, it was comprehended in it. However that may be, this manor of Garwintone, called as above, erroneously, in Domesday, Warwintone, was held of the abbot by a family who took their surname from it; one of whom, Richard de Garwynton, resided here at the latter end of king Henry II.'s reign, and had a chapel at his mansion here; and in 1194, the abbot granted to him and his heirs, to have the divine office celebrated for three days in a week in this chapel by the priest of Littleborne. (fn. 6) His descendant Thomas Garwinton was possessed of this manor and several other estates in this part of the county, in the 20th year of king Edward III. whose great-grandson William Garwynton dying S. P. Joane his kinswoman, married to Richard Haut, was anno II Henry IV. found to be his heir not only to this manor, but to much other lands in these parts, and their son Richard Haut having an only daughter and heir Margery, she carried this manor in marriage to William Isaac, esq. of Patrixborne, whose descendant Edward Isaac, at his death, gave this manor to his two daughter by his second wife, viz. Mary, married to Thomas Appleton, esq. of Suffolk, and Margaret, to John Jermye, second son of Sir John Jermye, of the same county, and they seem to have shared this manor between them. Thomas Appleton sold his share afterwards to Anthony Parker, who with Isaac Jermye, eldest son of John above-mentioned, joined in the sale of the entire see of it to Sir Henry Palmer, of Howlets, and he by his will in 1611, devised it to his nephew John Goodwyn, whose heirs some time afterwards passed it away by sale to George Curteis, esq. afterwards knighted, and of Otterden, and he alienated it to Sir Robert Hales, of Bekesborne, in whose descendants it continued down to Sir Philip Hales, bart. of Howlets, who in 1787, passed it away by sale to Isaac Baugh, esq. the present owner of it.
Charities.
John Dorrante, of Bekesborne, yeoman, in 1560, gave by will, to discharge the poor from the assessments of the church, the overplus to be paid to the most antient poor of the parish, the sum of 3s, 6d. on Palm Sunday and the Monday before Penticost; and 21s. 6d. on Christmas-day yearly, out of the house and lands called Church-house, now vested in Mr. Peter Inge.
Henry Sloyden, of Wickhambreaux, in 1568, gave by will to the poor of this parish and of Wickham, six acres and a half of land, called Church-close, to be divided between them yearly, now of the annual produce of 3l. 9s. 9d.
Sir Henry Palmer, by his will in 1611, gave 10s. to be paid yearly out of his manor of Welle, for the use of the poor.
James Franklyn, by will in 1616, gave to the parishes of Littleborne, Chistlet, and Hoathe, in Reculver, 5l. each, to be employed in a stock for the poor. This 5l. is now increased to 11l. this interest of which being 8s. 93frac34;d. is distributed among the poor in general.
Valentine Norton, gent. by his will, was a benefactor to the poor; but there are no particulars further known of it.
The poor constantly relieved are about fifty, casually thirtyfive.
This parish is within the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.
The church, which is dedicated to St. Vincent, consists of three isles and a chancel, having at the west end a low pointed steeple, in which hang five bells. The church is kept very neat. It is a good sized building, and is handsomely ceiled. The chancel is lostly, and has four narrow lancet windows on each side, and three at the end; in the former are the remains of good painted glass, and in the latter some years ago were the seven sacraments, &c. very handsomely done, with rich borders, but they have been some few years since removed. In it is a memorial for George I'anns, curate, obt. 1699. In the middle isle are several memorials for the family of Denne, for many descents lessees of the court-lodge, and descended from those of Dennehill, in Kingston, In the south-east window of the south isle is a saint holding a shield of arms, in front, Gules, three cocks, argent, being the arms of Bunington, on the lest side a moon, on the right a sun, all very well done; and there were formerly in one of the windows, the arms of Higham, argent, a lion passant regardant, between six cross-croslets fitchee, sable, impaling Gallaway, ermine, three lozenges, gules. A few years ago the north isle fell down, when there were some curious paintings discovered, by the breaking of the plaister from the walls. This isle was immediately rebuilt. In the church-yard, at the north-west part of it, are several tombs and head stones of the family of Denne before- mentioned.
¶The church of Littleborne was antiently appendant to the manor, part of the possessions of the abbot and convent of St. Augustine, and continued so till the year 1224, when Robert de Bello being chosen abbot, and finding much difficulty in obtaining the pope's benediction, to facilitate it, gave this church to the monastery of St. Mary de Monte Mirteto, in Italy, to which the pope, in 1241, appropriated it. Immediately after which, this parsonage, so appropriated, was demised to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine, in perpetual ferme, at the clear yearly sum of thirty marcs. (fn. 7) Four years after which, anno 1245, archbishop Stratford endowed the vicarage of it, the advowson of which was reserved to the abbot and convent of St. Augustine, when he decreed, that the vicarage should be endowed with a mansion, the tithes of filva cæ dua, of hay, and in three acres of arable, one acre of meadow, and in the receipt of three marcs and an half in money from the religious yearly, and in the tithes of flax, hemp, ducks, calves, pigeons, bees, milk, milkmeats, mills, wool, pigs, and in all oblations and other small tithes belonging to the church; and that the vicar should serve the church in divine rites, and find one chaplain to celebrate weekly in the chapel of Garwyntone, and to find bread, wine, and tapers, for celebrating divine rites in the church. Which endowment was afterwards, in 1370, certified by inspeximus, by archbishop Wittlesey. In which state this church and advowson remained till the final dissolution of the abbey of St. Augustine, in the 30th year of Henry VIII. when they came into the king's hands, and the king, in his 33d year, settled both, by his dotation-charter, on his new-erected dean and chapter of Canterbury, with whom they continue at this time. The parsonage has been from time to time let on a beneficial lease, Mr. Thomas Holness being the present lessee of it, but the advowson of the vicarage the dean and chapter retain in their own hands.
The vicarage of Littleborne is valued in the king's books at 7l. 19s. 10d. but the yearly tenths taken are sixteen shillings, the sum total being erroneonsly cast up in the king's books at eight pounds. The antient pension of 3l. 17s. 4d. from the abbey of St. Augustine's, is yearly received by the vicar out of the exchequer; the demesne lands of the court-lodge pay no greattithes, and the archbishop's woods in his own occupation pay none. In 1588 here were one hundred and fifty communicants; in 1640 the same, when it was valued at thirty-five pounds. It has been augmented by the dean and chapter with fifty pounds per annum.
The chapel of Lukedale, in the precinct of Well, was once esteemed as within the bounds of this parish, of which more may be seen herefter, under Ickham, to which parish Well is now annexed.
COLLECTION RECORD
Title - School Activities
Relation - Education in Democracy
relation.type - pendantOf
relation.notes - High School Graduates; Knowledge the Solution of the Problem; Comedy and Tragedy; Forever Panting and Forever Young; Sports Frenzy; American Rhythm
Work, Collection or Image - Collection
refid - 180
Work Type - mural paintings (visual works)
Style Period -
Agent Name - Daugherty, James Henry (American painter, illustrator, and author, 1889-1974)
Agent Role - muralist (painter)
Cultural Context - American
Material, medium - oil paint (paint)
Material, support -
Technique -
Measurements -
Date Created -
Date Completed -
Date Collected -
Date Allocated -
Date Rejected -
Location Former Repository - Music Room, Stamford High School, Stamford, Connecticut
Description -
Inscription -
Subject - Education; Study and diversion; Science; Federal Art Project
IMAGE RECORD
Work, Collection or Image - Image
Work Type - black-and-white photographs
Style Period - New Deal
Agent Name - La Roche, Karl
Agent Role - photographer
Material - black-and-white photographs
Technique - black-and-white photography
Measurements - 8 in (H) x 10 in (W)
Date Created - ca. 1935-1943
Date Digital - 2009-04-29
Description -
Inscription -
Source - Connecticut State Library, State Archives, RG 033, Works Progress Administration, Box 1.
Filename - wpaart_daugherty_006
Army JROTC Cadets from Northwest Rankin High School compete in the Army JROTC Leadership Competition on June 19 in Washington D.C. Forty Army JROTC teams from across the country – and Saipan and Germany – met at the nation’s capital June 18-21 to demonstrate their academic knowledge and skills learned in JROTC throughout the year and compete in the JROTC Leadership Bowl. | Sarah Windmueller, U.S. Army Cadet Command Public Affairs