Category Archives: Francis Schaeffer

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 161 A look at the BEATLES Breaking down the song ALL WE NEED IS LOVE Part B (Featured artist is Francis Hoyland )

Francis Schaeffer noted, “This record,  Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.”  Not only did the Beatles do that with the album Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band but they also tapped into the anti-war mood of the country with this song ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE just a few weeks after releasing the SGT PEP album.

How Should We then Live Episode 7 

__

___________

The next day, June 24th, 1967 (the day before The Big Event), EMI Studios decided to forego their usual ‘closed door’ policy and allow more than 100 journalists in to see the Beatles

__

April 19, 2016

Paul McCartney

Dear Paul,

I wonder what you will play at the April 30, 2016 concert in Little Rock that I will be attending and we may get to hear the song ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE. It is for  sure in my top 10 favorites list for the Beatles. The chorus is very simple indeed:

Love, love, love
Love, love, love
Love, love, love
All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need
It’s easy

In the 1991 interview with Bob Costas at the 21 min mark is the following exchange:

Bob Costas: “But what do you think is the lasting meaning of The Beatles, if there’s a meaning to be taken from this?”

Paul McCartney: ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE. After the 1960’s that kind  of looked upon as a bit kind of stupid. HEY ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE DUDE!!! We need more. We need weapons and defense or whatever, which is also true, but it keeps rolling back to this idea that what these people on this planet need is love.

I always say to people that we could have had a really satanic message and with the power we had we could have made a difference the other way.  But we always chose not to do that and nobody was remotely interested in that. We had this idea that ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE. I still believe it.

Bob Costas: You wrote “In the end the love you take is equal to the love you make.”

Paul McCartney: I still think that is true. I think he idea gets knocked so often because it is a violent world and you do need other things, but I still think that is the message [ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE].

You really made a good point when you said that we live in a violent world. I would side with the Bible and call it a FALLEN WORLD because sin entered in when man fell in the Garden of Eden. What is the remedy? It is the good news of the gospel and the fact that Christ came to this world 2000 years ago and lived a perfect life and then died on the cross not for his sins but for ours.

(Aaron Williams worship leader at Fellowship Bible Church, Little Rock)

At the October 25, 2015 service at Fellowship Bible Church the song NEVER ENDING LOVE by Aaron Williams was played and it included these words “In your never ending love, You rescue me, You sought me out, You set me free.” The Gospel of John 15:14 says, “This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.” That is exactly what Christ did for us. He died for us as a substitute!!!

Never Ending Love (feat. Aaron Williams)

Published on May 4, 2015

Aaron Williams leading “Never Ending Love” from the debut album “Invitation :: Volume One” by 10,000 Fathers.

Worldwide release May 5th 2015: https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/inv…

________________

This next article is excerpt from Kimberly Wagner’s book  Fierce Women: The Power of a Soft Warrior

True Love Originates at the Cross

True Love Originates at the Cross

The word gospel means “good news” and this is the good news—Jesus Christ came to suffer the penalty for our sin and cleanse us from all unrighteousness, so that we could enter into relationship with Holy God!

He extends this offer of friendship to you:

These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full. This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends….
You are My friends if you do what I command you. No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends . . . (John 15:14–15).

Let that soak in. Amazing love. 

This beautiful invitation to friendship is straight from Jesus’ mouth as He spoke with His disciples shortly before his death. While preparing them for His departure, one of the topics He covered was—friendship! He loves us. He laid down His life for us. He desires a personal relationship with us and He invites you to be His friend.

Entering into this love relationship involves admitting your sinful condition and your inability to approach a holy God on your own. As you express your need for His forgiveness and turn from your sin, confessing your need for Him, He will cleanse you, His Spirit will fill you and your new life in Christ can begin (Romans 3:21–24; 5:6–15; 1 Corinthians 6:19–20; 1 John 1:9).

Only then can you have the needed foundation to experience and share love.

Only with Christ as the object of your love can you receive and give love to others.

Love’s deepest mystery is the passion of Christ as He pursues His bride with white-hot devotion. He wants to capture your heart. As the Bridegroom, He’s orchestrated a divine rescue. The love demonstrated at the cross held no selfish gain. He desires to woo you and win your heart. He extends an extravagant offer of love. By laying down His life, He offers you deliverance from the domain of darkness.

Because of Christ’s redemptive work on the cross, because grace flows when we humble ourselves and cry out to Him for help—we can give and receive love the way we were created to experience. You, who are restless and weary of heart, find your heart’s rest here. Christ offers true love to you. You may never have known or even imagined a love of this proportion.

We, who are helpless, can find our need fully met in this Man. 

You may be longing for love, wandering through a wilderness of pain and isolation, I assure you—no love relationship can compare to the one He offers. The pursuit of love must begin here.

Our first experience of true love originates at the cross. Have you experienced that?

Excerpt from Fierce Women: The Power of a Soft Warrior © 2012• Kimberly Wagner • Moody Publishers

Let me share an Old Testament prophecy that indicates the Bible is true concerning Christ being executed on a cross. Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel’s King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah’s death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead.

Psalm 22 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

For the choir director; upon [a]Aijeleth Hashshahar. A Psalm of David (Solomon’s father)

22 My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
[b]Far from my deliverance are the words of my [c]groaning.
O my God, I cry by day, but You do not answer;
And by night, but [d]I have no rest.
But I am a worm and not a man,

A reproach of men and despised by the people.
7 All who see me [g]sneer at me;
They [h]separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying,
[i]Commit yourself to the Lord; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.”

12 Many bulls have surrounded me;
Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me.
13 They open wide their mouth at me,
As a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water,
And all my bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It is melted within [l]me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And my tongue cleaves to my jaws;
And You lay me [m]in the dust of death.
16 For dogs have surrounded me;
[n]A band of evildoers has encompassed me;
[o]They pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones.
They look, they stare at me;
18 They divide my garments among them,
And for my clothing they cast lots.

Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher, everettehatcher@gmail.com, http://www.thedailyhatch.org, cell ph 501-920-5733, Box 23416, LittleRock, AR 72221

(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)

There’s nothing you can do that can’t be done
Nothing you can sing that can’t be sung
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game
It’s easy

There’s nothing you can make that can’t be made
No one you can save that can’t be saved
Nothing you can do but you can learn to be you in time
It’s easy

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)
(Love, love, love)

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

There’s nothing you can know that isn’t known
Nothing you can see that isn’t shown
There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be
It’s easy

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

All you need is love, all together now
All you need is love, everybody
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

Love is all you need
Love is all you need
Love is all you need

Songwriters
LENNON, JOHN / MCCARTNEY, PAUL

Published by
Lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

Read more: Beatles – All You Need Is Love Lyrics | MetroLyrics

 

The Beatles All You Need is Love (HQ).mp4

_________________

Uploaded on Feb 11, 2012

“All You Need Is Love” is a song written by John Lennon and credited to Lennon/McCartney. It was first performed by The Beatles on Our World, the first live global television link. Watched by 400 million in 26 countries, the program was broadcast via satellite on 25 June 1967. The BBC had commissioned The Beatles to write a song for the United Kingdom’s contribution.

For the broadcast, The Beatles were (except for Starr) seated on stools, accompanied by a small studio orchestra. They were surrounded by friends and acquaintances seated on the floor, many of whom were among the leading stars of the British pop scene, who sang with the refrain during the fade-out. The performance was not completely live: The Beatles, the orchestra, and guests were overdubbing onto a pre-recorded rhythm track mainly consisting of piano, harpsichord, drums, and backing vocals. The full Our World segment opens with the band and company listening to the raw backing track, as commentator Steve Race explained the process in voiceover. The live overdubs seem to include not only lead vocals, orchestra, and the improvised call-and-response, but also bass guitar, Harrison’s guitar solo, and a second drum track — which seems to go out of time with the original track during the first few bars. At the beginning of the song, under “La Marseillaise,” a tambourine is shaken, but this was mixed out and replaced with a drum roll before the single was released. Lennon, affecting indifference, was said to be nervous about the broadcast, given the potential size of the international TV audience. Dissatisfied with his singing, he re-recorded the solo verses for use on the single. Starr also overdubbed drums before the single was released, fixing the aforementioned timing problems and adding the drum roll.
The programme was broadcast in ‘black-and-white’ (colour television had yet to commence broadcasting in Britain and most of the world). The Beatles’ footage was colourised, based on photographs of the event, for The Beatles Anthology documentary

_________

Question: “What is the love of Christ?”

Answer: The phrase “love of Christ,” as opposed to “love for Christ,” refers to the love that He has toward mankind. His love can be briefly stated as His willingness to act in our best interest, especially in meeting our greatest need, even though it cost Him everything and even though we were the least worthy of such love.

Though Christ Jesus, being God in nature, existed from the beginning of time with God the Father (John 1:1) and the Holy Spirit, He willingly left His throne (John 1:1-14) to become a man, that He might pay the penalty for our sin so that we would not have to pay for it for all eternity in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15). Because mankind’s sin has been paid for by our sinless Savior Jesus Christ, God who is just and holy can now forgive our sins when we accept Christ Jesus’ payment as our own (Romans 3:21-26). Thus, Christ’s love is shown in His leaving His home in heaven, where He was worshipped and honored as He deserved, to come to earth as a man where He would be mocked, betrayed, beaten, and crucified on a cross to pay the penalty for our sin, rising again from the dead on the third day. He considered our need of a Savior from our sin and its penalty as more important than His own comfort and life (Philippians 2:3-8).

Sometimes people may give their lives willingly for ones they deem as worthy—a friend, a relative, other “good” people—but Christ’s love goes beyond that. Christ’s love extends to those most unworthy of it. He willingly took the punishment of those who tortured Him, hated Him, rebelled against Him, and cared nothing about Him, those who were most undeserving of His love (Romans 5:6-8). He gave the most He could give for those who deserved it the least! Sacrifice, then, is the essence of godly love, called agape love. This is God-like love, not man-like love (Matthew 5:43-48).

This love which He demonstrated toward us on the cross is just the beginning. When we place our trust in Him as our Savior, He makes us God’s children, co-heirs with Him! He comes to dwell within us through His Holy Spirit, promising that He will never leave us or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5-6). Thus, we have a loving companion for life. And no matter what we go through, He is there, and His love is ever available to us (Romans 8:35). But as He rightfully reigns as a benevolent King in heaven, we need to give Him the position He deserves in our lives as well, that of Master and not merely companion. It is only then that we will experience life as He intended and live in the fullness of His love (John 10:10b).

Recommended Resources: The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God by D.A. Carson and Logos Bible Software.

All You Need Is Love

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Beatles song. For other uses, see All You Need Is Love (disambiguation).
“All You Need Is Love”

US picture sleeve
Single by The Beatles
B-side Baby, You’re a Rich Man
Released 7 July 1967
Format 7″
Recorded 14 and 19–26 June 1967,
Olympic and EMI studios, London
Genre
Length 3:57
Label
Writer(s) Lennon–McCartney
Producer(s) George Martin
Certification Gold (RIAA)[2]
The Beatles singles chronology
Strawberry Fields Forever” / “Penny Lane
(1967)
All You Need Is Love
(1967)
Hello, Goodbye
(1967)
Magical Mystery Tour track listing
Alternative cover

1987 20th anniversary re-release

All You Need Is Love” is a song written by John Lennon[3] and credited to Lennon–McCartney. It was first performed by the Beatles on Our World, the first live global television link. Watched by over 400 million in 25 countries, the programme was broadcast via satellite on 25 June 1967.[4] The BBC had commissioned the Beatles to write a song for the United Kingdom’s contribution.

Composition[edit]

The Beatles were asked to come up with a song with a message understood by everyone. “It was an inspired song and they really wanted to give the world a message,” said Brian Epstein. “The nice thing about it is that it cannot be misinterpreted. It is a clear message saying that love is everything.”[5] According to journalist Jade Wright, “Lennon was fascinated by the power of slogans to unite people and never afraid to create art out of propaganda. When asked in 1971 whether songs like “Give Peace a Chance” and “Power to the People” were propaganda songs, he answered: ‘Sure. So was All You Need Is Love. I’m a revolutionary artist. My art is dedicated to change.'”[5]

The day before the Our World broadcast, the Beatles decided that the song should be their next single.[citation needed] Released in the UK on 7 July 1967, it went straight to number one and remained there for three weeks.[citation needed] It was similarly successful in the United States after its release on 17 July, reaching number one for a week.[6] It was also included on the American LP version of Magical Mystery Tour in November [7] as well as in the film, and on the LP Yellow Submarine, released in 1969. This song is also featured in the Cirque du Soleil‘s show Love, based on the songs of The Beatles, which has been performing in Las Vegas since 2006.

The interviews on The Beatles Anthology documentary series reveal that Paul McCartney and George Harrison were unsure whether the song was written for Our World. However,George Martin and Ringo Starr assert it was. When asked, McCartney replied:

“I don’t think it was written specially for it. But it was one of the songs we had. … It was certainly tailored to it once we had it. But I’ve got a feeling it was just one of John’s songs that was coming there. We went down to Olympic Studios in Barnes and recorded it and then it became the song they said, ‘Ah. This is the one we should use.’ I don’t actually think it was written for it.”[8]

Musical structure[edit]

The song starts with the intro to the French national anthem, “La Marseillaise“, and contains elements from Glenn Miller‘s 1939 hit “In the Mood“, as well as elements from Wayne Shanklin‘s 1958 hit “Chanson D’Amour“. The song is notable for its asymmetric time signature and complex changes. The main verse pattern contains a total of 29 beats, split into two 7/4 measures, a single bar of 8/4, followed by a one bar return of 7/4 before repeating the pattern. The chorus, however, maintains a steady 4/4 beat with the exception of the last bar of 6/4 (on the lyric ‘love is all you need’). The prominent cello line draws attention to this departure from pop-single normality, although it was not the first time that the Beatles had experimented with varied meter within a single song: “We Can Work It Out” and “Strawberry Fields Forever” are other examples. The song is in the key of G and the verse opens (on “There’s nothing you can do”) with a G chord and D melody note, the chords shifting in a I-V/7-vi chord progression while the bass simultaneously follows the tonic(G) to the relative minor (Em), but via an F♯. Indeed, throughout this song McCartney’s bass implies many additional chords over those played by the other instruments.[9]

After the verse “learn how to play the game, it’s easy”, the bass alters the prolonged V (D) chord with F#, E, C and B note modulations.[10] The song is notable for a dramatic use of a dominant or V chord (here D) on “It’s easy.”[11] The “Love, love, love” chant involves chords in a I-V7-vi shift (G-D-Em) and simultaneous descending B, A, G notes with the concluding G note corresponding not to the tonic G chord, but acting as a 3rd of the Em chord; this also introducing the E note of the Em chord as a 6th of the tonic G scale. Supporting the same melody note with different and unexpected chords has been termed a characteristic Beatles technique.[12]

Producer George Martin recalled that “the boys … wanted to freak out at the end, and just go mad”.[13] So during the long fade-out, elements of various other songs can be heard, including “Greensleeves“, Invention No. 8 in F major (BWV 779) by J.S. Bach, “In the Mood“, and the Beatles’ own 1963 hit “She Loves You“,[14] the latter of which Paul sings.

Live broadcast[edit]

For the broadcast, the Beatles were (except for Starr) seated on stools, accompanied by a small studio orchestra. They were surrounded by friends and acquaintances seated on the floor, many of whom were among the leading stars of the British pop scene, who sang with the refrain during the fade-out.

The performance was not completely live: the Beatles, the orchestra, and guests were overdubbing onto a prerecorded rhythm track mainly consisting of piano, harpsichord, drums, and backing vocals. The full Our Worldsegment opens with the band and company listening to the raw backing track, as commentator Steve Race explained the process in voiceover.[citation needed]

Lennon, affecting indifference, was said to be nervous about the broadcast, given the potential size of the international TV audience. Dissatisfied with his singing, he rerecorded the solo verses for use on the single.[15][16] Starr also overdubbed drums before the single was released,[16] fixing the aforementioned timing problems and adding the drum roll.

The programme was broadcast in black-and-white (colour television had yet to commence broadcasting in Britain and most of the world). The Beatles’ footage was colourised, based on photographs of the event, for The Beatles Anthology documentary.[17]

U.S. chart run[edit]

Billboard Hot 100[18] (11 weeks): Reached #1 (1 week), becoming the band’s 14th #1 there.

Cashbox[19] (9 weeks): 27, 3, 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, 9, 24

Personnel[edit]

Personnel per Ian MacDonald and The Beatles Bible.[21][22]

Chart performance[edit]

Chart (1967) Peak
position
Australia (Kent Music Report)[23] 1
Austria (Ö3 Austria Top 40)[24] 1
Belgium (Ultratop 50 Flanders)[25] 4
Canadian RPM Top Singles[26] 1
Germany (Official German Charts)[27] 1
Irish Singles Chart[28] 1
Italy (FIMI)[29] 10
Netherlands (Dutch Top 40)[30] 1
Netherlands (Single Top 100)[31] 1
Norway (VG-lista)[32] 1
UK (Official Charts Company)[33] 1
U.S. Billboard Hot 100[34] 1
U.S. Cashbox[19] 1
Chart (1987) (Reissue) Peak
position
Irish Singles Chart[28] 19
UK (Official Charts Company)[33] 47

Cover versions[edit]

Group or artist’s name Release date Album title Additional information
The 5th Dimension 1971–10 The 5th Dimension/Live![35]
New Musik 1982 Warp
Echo & the Bunnymen 1984 Seven Seas“Life at Brian’s – Lean and Hungry” This version is included on the 1988 release New Live and Rare.[36] This version is also included on Crystal Days: 1979-1999; they also released a live cover as a bonus track on the 2003 re-release of their 1984 album Ocean Rain.
Bajaga i Instruktori 1986 7″ single[37]
Eddie Chacon 1987 12″ single[38] Columbia 4406930
Tears for Fears 1990 Going to California (Live DVD) Orzabal changed some of the lyrics and incorporated the phrase “Raoul and the Kings of Spain” which would go on to be the title of afuture album.
Anything Box 1991–05 Worth[39]
Tom Jones 1993–01 single[40]
Ferrante & Teicher 1993-01-29 The Greatest Love Songs of All[41]
The Undead 1998–07 Till Death[42]
Lynden David Hall 2003-11-11 Love Actually[43]
Nada Surf 2006 Featured in a Chase Credit Card commercial
Dana Fuchs & Jim Sturgess 2007 Across the Universe
Beatallica 2008 single Parodied as “All You Need is Blood
Noel Gallagher 2009 The Dreams We Have as Children (Live for Teenage Cancer Trust)
Bandaged 2009 single (BBC Children in Need) Taken from the Bandaged Together album and featuring rock, pop and classical artists[44]
One Direction 2010 Performed live on The X Factor during the show’s elimination rounds.
Japan United with Music 2012-03-07 single Charity single for recovery from the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. Produced by Ryuichi Sakamoto and Takeshi Kobayashi, and featuring many artists such as Yellow Magic Orchestra, Crystal Kay, Tomoyasu Hotei, Kazutoshi Sakurai, Sugizo and Bonnie Pink.[45]
The Flaming Lips (feat. Alex and Jade ofEdward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros) 2013-04-01 The Terror Taken from the UK Bella Union exclusive 3″ mini CD
Glee cast 2013 Glee Sings the Beatles Also performed on Season Five Premiere, “Love Love Love

Also notable is the use of the song in a February 1, 2015 Super Bowl commercial for Ecuadorian tourism.[46] The song is sung over images of Ecuador and the commercial ends by saying “All you need is Ecuador, Ecuador is all you need” instead.

_________

 

   Featured artist today is Francis Hoyland

Contemporary Christian Art – The Rt Revd Lord Harries of Pentregarth

 

Published on Apr 10, 2012

Contrary to much opinion, the current scene of faith-related art is very much alive. There are new commissions for churches and cathedrals, a number of artists pursue their work on the basis of a deeply convinced faith, and other artists often resonate with traditional Christian themes, albeit in a highly untraditional way. The challenge for the artist, stated in the introduction to the course of lectures above, is still very much there: how to retain artistic integrity whilst doing justice to received themes.

This lecture is part of Lord Harries’ series on ‘Christian Faith and Modern Art’. The last century has seen changes in artistic style that have been both rapid and radical. This has presented a particular problem to artists who have wished to express Christian themes.

The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:
http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and…

Gresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website.
http://www.gresham.ac.uk

____

Francis Hoyland, 1930

Nativity Polyptich, 1961, OxfordBrooksUniversity

Francis Hoyland was born in Birmingham and educated at Camberwell and the Slade. He continues to teach and write as well as paint. He has always painted religious images in addition to his other work and became a Roman Catholic in 1979; from what he has written of himself and the relation to his painting, a devout one. For the last 30 years he has been working on a 91 picture series on the Life of Christ. This is not publicly accessible at the moment and I suspect it will prove to be his best work. [1]

 __

Crucifixion, 1956, Arts Council

[1] Judged by the painting exhibited and reproduced in Images of Christ, St Matthews, Northampton, 1993, p.49

From his website:

I’ve always been a painter. It has seemed to be a normal and sensible thing to do; even though it does not look this way to others. It is the ‘other’ activities that look abnormal and odd to me.

Painting has its own momentum; it is a journey towards an aspect of truth that cannot be apprehended in any other way. It is a journey that is never finished since what one has done in the past is never what one wants to do now. One changes and ones pictures change with one, but I do not know if I’m hurrying to catch up with my paintings or if my paintings are hurrying to catch up with me.

My paintings and drawings fall into two categories; paintings and drawings made directly from nature, and work that I make completely out of my head. This second aspect of my pictorial nature was largely generated by a scholarship to Italy when I was 21. While I was there I came under the spell of the great cycles of frescos that adorn many Italian churches. I still want to paint large pictures of religious subjects that illustrate my catholic faith, and I would like these paintings to be housed in churches. I have, as it happens, twice filled or nearly filled, cathedral sized churches with my work; once in Southwark Cathedral and once in Southwell Minster, but these works have come back to me or have been sold elsewhere.

To paint is to meditate, not to compete, in fact to be a reasonable painter now one has to be almost anti competitive. We need to close ranks against a tide of commercially generated imagery, an imagery that has become virtually ubiquitous. Some of my happiest moments have been spent with other artists, often fellow teachers, in large classes in which we mutually define ourselves in loving fellowship with each other. Such occasions seem to trigger new stages of my/our work. The meditation that takes place as work before nature consists of a constant consideration of the role of the individual beats, or sensations, within the total context of the rectangle with which I’m working on. The differences between my subject matter, my materials and myself challenge me to experience something, or rather Someone, who gave rise to these things. St Teresa ‘saw’ the whole of creation as a many faceted crystal held in the mind of God. I aspire to the same vision – painting is an attempt to share it.

I have made several versions of the “Life of Christ” in as many as 91 individual works.As I read the gospels I imagine the people and places they refer to, and, to a certain extent, ‘see’ them. Taking a design through various stages of drawing, etching and painting, gradually clarifies my vision and the understanding of the text. As I attempt to build a credible space the personalities and protagonists become more focused and their relationship to each other more exact.

Line is important and colour a joy. The motif for a painting is love.

The series of the life of Christ awaits completion in large canvases, but where shall I put them? If any of the smaller paintings appeal to you, you might consider commissioning a ‘final’ version!

____________

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 63 THE BEATLES (Part O , BECAUSE THE BEATLES LOVED HUMOR IT IS FITTING THAT 6 COMEDIANS MADE IT ON THE COVER OF “SGT. PEPPER’S”!) (Feature on artist H.C. Westermann )

__________________ A Funny Press Interview of The Beatles in The US (1964) Funny Pictures of The Beatles Published on Oct 23, 2012 funny moments i took from the beatles movie; A Hard Days Night ___________________ Scene from Help! The Beatles Funny Clips and Outtakes (Part 1) The Beatles * Wildcat* (funny) Uploaded on Mar 20, […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 62 THE BEATLES (Part N The last 4 people alive from cover of Stg. Pepper’s and the reason Bob Dylan was put on the cover!) (Feature on artist Larry Bell)

_____________________ Great article on Dylan and Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Cover: A famous album by the fab four – The Beatles – is “Sergeant peppers lonely hearts club band“. The album itself is one of the must influential albums of all time. New recording techniques and experiments with different styles of music made this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 61 THE BEATLES (Part M, Why was Karl Marx on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist George Petty)

__________________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview 69 THE BEATLES TWO OF US As a university student, Karl Marx (1818-1883) joined a movement known as the Young Hegelians, who strongly criticized the political and cultural establishments of the day. He became a journalist, and the radical nature of his writings would eventually get him expelled by the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 60 THE BEATLES (Part L, Why was Aleister Crowley on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Jann Haworth )

____________ Aleister Crowley on cover of Stg. Pepper’s: _______________ I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 59 THE BEATLES (Part K, Advocating drugs was reason Aldous Huxley was on cover of Stg. Pepper’s) (Feature on artist Aubrey Beardsley)

(HD) Paul McCartney & Ringo Starr – With a Little Help From My Friends (Live) John Lennon The Final Interview BBC Radio 1 December 6th 1980 A young Aldous Huxley pictured below: _______   Much attention in this post is given to the songs LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS and TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS which […]

 

 

__

MUSIC MONDAY George Harrison’s song MY SWEET LORD and what the word GOD actually means according to Francis Schaeffer

__

Image result for beatles in india

George Harrison is the only member of the Beatles who stuck with Hinduism while the other three abandoned it shortly after their one trip to India.  Francis Schaeffer noted, ” The younger people and the older ones tried drug taking but then turned to the eastern religions. Both drugs and the eastern religions seek truth inside one’s own head, a negation of reason. The central reason of the popularity of eastern religions in the west is a hope for a nonrational meaning to life and values. The reason the young people turn to eastern religion is simply the fact as we have said and that is that man having moved into the area of nonreason could put anything up there and the heart of the eastern religions  is a denial of reason just exactly as the idealistic drug taking was.”

_

George Harrison My Sweet Lord

Francis Schaeffer in his book HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? (page 191 Vol 5) asserted:

But this finally brings them to the place where the word GOD merely becomes the word GOD, and no certain content can be put into it. In this many of the established theologians are in the same position as George Harrison (1943-) (the former Beatles guitarist) when he wrote MY SWEET LORD (1970). Many people thought he had come to Christianity. But listen to the words in the background: “Krishna, Krishna, Krishna.” Krishna is one Hindu name for God. This song expressed  no content, just a feeling of religious experience. To Harrison, the words were equal: Christ or Krishna. Actually, neither the word used nor its content was of importance. 

This problem has been around for a long time because people need to clarify what they mean when they say the word GOD. Many years ago Charles Darwin even had to clarify this same issue when he responded to different letters. Recently I read the online book  Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters, and in it I noticed that Francis Darwin wrote In 1879 Charles Darwin was applied to by a German student, in a similar manner. The letter was answered by a member of my father’s family, who wrote:–

“Mr. Darwin…considers that the theory of Evolution is quite compatible with the belief in a God; but that you must remember that different persons have different definitions of what they mean by God.” 

Francis Schaeffer commented:

You find a great confusion in Darwin’s writings although there is a general structure in them. Here he says the word “God” is alright but you find later what he doesn’t take is a personal God. Of course, what you open is the whole modern linguistics concerning the word “God.” is God a pantheistic God? What kind of God is God? Darwin says there is nothing incompatible with the word “God.”

(Francis Schaeffer pictured below)

“My Sweet Lord”

I really want to know you
Really want to go with you
Really want to show you lord
That it won’t take long, my lord (hallelujah)
Hm, my lord (hallelujah)
My, my, my lord (hare krishna)
My sweet lord (hare krishna)
My sweet lord (krishna krishna)
My lord (hare hare)
Hm, hm (Gurur Brahma)
Hm, hm (Gurur Vishnu)
Hm, hm (Gurur Devo)
Hm, hm (Maheshwara)
My sweet lord (Gurur Sakshaat)
My sweet lord (Parabrahma)
My, my, my lord (Tasmayi Shree)
My, my, my, my lord (Guruve Namah)
My sweet lord (Hare Rama)Look at the first two lines above, “I really want to know you, Really want to go with you.” Is this just a mumbo jumbo kind of talk or did krishna, Gurur Brahma, Vishnu,  Devo, Maheshwara, Parabrahma, Tasmayi Shree, Namah and Rama all speak of a historical faith rooted in history that can be researched?

Thought Snack: What Christian Faith Really Is

“Suppose we are climbing in the Alps and are very high on the bare rock, and suddenly the fog shuts down. The guide turns to us and says that the ice is forming and there is no hope; before morning we will all freeze to death here on the shoulder of the mountain. Simply to keep warm the guide keeps us moving in the dense fog further out on the shoulder until none of us have any idea where we are. After an hour or so, someone says to the guide, ‘Suppose I dropped and hit a ledge ten feet down in the fog. What would happen then?’ The guide would say that you might make it until the morning and thus live. So, with absolutely no knowledge or any reason to support his action, one of the group hangs and drops into the fog. This would be one kind of faith, a leap of faith.Suppose, however, after we have worked out on the shoulder in the midst of the fog and the growing ice on the rock, we had stopped and we heard a voice which said, ‘You cannot see me, but I know exactly where you are from your voices. I am on another ridge. I have lived in these mountains, man and boy, for over sixty years and I know every foot of them. I assure you that ten feet below you there is a ledge. If you hang and drop, you can make it through the night and I will get you in the morning.’I would not hang and drop at once, but would ask questions to try to ascertain if the man knew what he was talking about and if he was not my enemy. In the Alps, for example, I would ask him his name. If the name he gave me was the name of a family from that part of the mountains, it would count a great deal to me. In the Swiss Alps there are certain family names that indicate mountain families of that area. In my desperate situation, even though time would be running out, I would ask him what to me would be the adequate and sufficient questions, and when I became convinced by his answers, then I would hang and drop.This is faith, but obviously it has no relationship to the other use of the word. As a matter of fact, if one of these is called faith, the other should not be designated by the same word. The historic Christian faith is not a leap of faith in the post-Kierkegaardian sense because [God] is not silent, and I am invited to ask the adequate and sufficient questions, not only in regard to details, but also in regard to the existence of the universe and its complexity and in regard to the existence of man. I am invited to ask adequate and sufficient questions and then believe Him and bow before Him metaphysically in knowing that I exist because He made man, and bow before Him morally as needing His provision for me in the substitutionary, propitiatory death of Christ.” – Francis Schaeffer, Francis A. Schaeffer Trilogy: The God Who Is There, Escape From Reason, He Is There and He Is Not Silent__________________________In the 1960’s when so many young people from the USA jumped into eastern religions Francis Schaeffer called it a leap into non-reason and Schaeffer also asserted:

The universe was created by an infinite personal God and He brought it into existence by spoken word and made man in His own image. When man tries to reduce [philosophically in a materialistic point of view] himself to less than this [less than being made in the image of God] he will always fail and he will always be willing to make these impossible leaps into the area of nonreason even though they don’t give an answer simply because that isn’t what he is. He himself testifies that this infinite personal God, the God of the Old and New Testament is there. 

Instead of making a leap into the area of non-reason the better choice would be to investigate the claims that the Bible is a historically accurate book and that God created the universe and reached out to humankind with the Bible. Below is a piece of that evidence given by Francis Schaeffer concerning the accuracy of the Bible.

TRUTH AND HISTORY (chapter 5 of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?, under footnote #95)

Two things should be mentioned about the time of Moses in Old Testament history.

The form of the covenant made at Sinai has remarkable parallels with the covenant forms of other people at that time. (On covenants and parties to a treaty, the Louvre; and Treaty Tablet from Boghaz Koi (i.e., Hittite) in Turkey, Museum of Archaeology in Istanbul.) The covenant form at Sinai resembles just as the forms of letter writings of the first century after Christ (the types of introductions and greetings) are reflected in the letters of the apostles in the New Testament, it is not surprising to find the covenant form of the second millennium before Christ reflected in what occurred at Mount Sinai. God has always spoken to people within the culture of their time, which does not mean that God’s communication is limited by that culture. It is God’s communication but within the forms appropriate to the time.

The Pentateuch tells us that Moses led the Israelites up the east side of the Dead Sea after their long stay in the desert. There they encountered the hostile kingdom of Moab. We have firsthand evidence for the existence of this kingdom of Moab–contrary to what has been said by critical scholars who have denied the existence of Moab at this time. It can be found in a war scene from a temple at Luxor (Al Uqsor). This commemorates a victory by Ramses II over the Moabite nation at Batora (Luxor Temple, Egypt).

Also the definite presence of the Israelites in west Palestine (Canaan) no later than the end of the thirteenth century B.C. is attested by a victory stela of Pharaoh Merenptah (son and successor of Ramses II) to commemorate his victory over Libya (Israel Stela, Cairo Museum, no. 34025). In it he mentions his previous success in Canaan against Aschalon, Gize, Yenom, and Israel; hence there can be no doubt the nation of Israel was in existence at the latest by this time of approximately 1220 B.C. This is not to say it could not have been earlier, but it cannot be later than this date.

Merneptah Stele, Israel 1200 BC

____

Related posts:

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 8 Blue & Lonesome is the album any Rolling Stones fan would have wished for – review Neil McCormick, music critic

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 8 Rolling Stones – Hoo Doo Blues Blue & Lonesome is the album any Rolling Stones fan would have wished for – review 9 Comments Evergreen: The Rolling Stones perform in Cuba earlier this year CREDIT: REX FEATURES Neil McCormick, music critic 22 NOVEMBER 2016 • 12:19PM The Rolling […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 7 The Rolling Stones Alexis Petridis’s album of the week The Rolling Stones: Blue & Lonesome review – more alive than they’ve sounded for years

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 7 Rolling Stones – Everybody Knows About My Good Thing The Rolling Stones Alexis Petridis’s album of the week The Rolling Stones: Blue & Lonesome review – more alive than they’ve sounded for years 4/5stars Mick Jagger’s voice and harmonica drive an album of blues covers that returns […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 6 Music Review: ‘Blue & Lonesome’ by the Rolling Stones By Gregory Katz | AP November 29

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 6 Rolling Stones – Just Like I Treat You   Music Review: ‘Blue & Lonesome’ by the Rolling Stones By Gregory Katz | AP November 29 The Rolling Stones, “Blue & Lonesome” (Interscope) It shouldn’t be a surprise, really, but still it’s a bit startling to hear just how well […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 5 Review: The Rolling Stones make blues magic on ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Maeve McDermott , USATODAY6:07 p.m. EST November 30, 2016

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 5 Rolling Stones – Everybody Knows About My Good Thing Review: The Rolling Stones make blues magic on ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Maeve McDermott , USATODAY6:07 p.m. EST November 30, 2016 (Photo: Frazer Harrison, Getty Images) Before the Rolling Stones were rock icons, before its members turned into sex […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 4 Rolling Stones, ‘Blue & Lonesome’: Album Review By Michael Gallucci November 30, 2016 1:34 PM

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 4 Rolling Stones – Little Rain       Rolling Stones, ‘Blue & Lonesome’: Album Review By Michael Gallucci November 30, 2016 1:34 PM Read More: Rolling Stones, ‘Blue & Lonesome’: Album Review | http://ultimateclassicrock.com/rolling-stones-blue-lonesome-review/?trackback=tsmclip The Rolling Stones were never really a thinking band. A shrewd one, for sure, […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 3 Rolling Stones – ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Review Barry Nicolson 12:52 pm – Dec 2, 2016

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 3 The Rolling Stones Mick Jagger chats about new album “Blue & Lonesome” on BBC Breakfast 02 Dec 2016 Rolling Stones – I Gotta Go     Rolling Stones – ‘Blue & Lonesome’ Review Barry Nicolson 12:52 pm – Dec 2, 2016 57shares The Stones sound their youngest […]

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 2 Review The Rolling Stones’ new blues album is an amplified death wheeze. And it rules

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 1 Review: The Rolling Stones Reinvigorate the Blues on ‘Blue and Lonesome’ Our take on rock legends’ first LP since 2005

MUSIC MONDAY Rolling Stones New Album Part 1 The Rolling Stones – Ride ‘Em On Down Published on Dec 1, 2016 Taken from Blue & Lonesome, the brand new album out now. Buy it at http://www.rollingstones.com/blueandl…. Directed by François Rousselet http://www.riffrafffilms.tv/video/dir… Produced by Natalie Arnett Riff Raff Films http://www.riffrafffilms.tv http://www.rollingstones.com/http://www.facebook.com/therollingstones http://twitter.com/RollingStoneshttp://www.rollingstones.com/newsletter Rolling Stones […]

MUSIC MONDAY Karen Carpenter’s tragic story

_____________ Carpenters Close To You Karen Carpenter’s tragic story Karen Carpenter’s velvet voice charmed millions in the 70s… but behind the wholesome image she was in turmoil. Desperate to look slim on stage – and above all desperate to please the domineering mother who preferred her brother – she became the first celebrity victim of […]

MUSIC MONDAY The Carpenters!!!

carpenters -We’ve Only Just Begun The Carpenters – Yesterday Once More (INCLUDES LYRICS) The Carpenters – There’s a kind of hush The Carpenters – Greatest Hits Related posts: MUSIC MONDAY Paul McCartney Mull Of Kintyre November 13, 2016 – 10:29 am Paul McCartney Mull Of Kintyre-Original Video-HQ Uploaded on Nov 25, 2011 Paul McCartney Mull Of […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 160 A look at the BEATLES Breaking down the song ALL WE NEED IS LOVE Part A (Featured artist is Shirazeh Houshiary)

Francis Schaeffer pictured below

Francis Schaeffer wrote, “The Beatles moved through several stages, including the concept of the drug and PSYCHEDELIC APPROACH. The PSYCHEDELIC began with their records REVOLVER, STRAWBERRY FIELDS FOREVER, AND PENNY LANE. This was developed with great expertness in their record SERGEANT PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND in which psychedelic music, with open statements concerning drug-taking, was knowingly presented as a religious answer.”

The Beatles – 51 Years Ago Today – All You Need is Love

All You Need Is Love – 1s Preview

Paul McCartney, Joe Cocker, Eric Clapton & Rod Stewart – All You Need Is Love (LIVE) HD

All You Need Is Love

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Beatles song. For other uses, see All You Need Is Love (disambiguation).
“All You Need Is Love”

US picture sleeve
Single by The Beatles
Released 7 July 1967
Recorded 14 and 19–26 June 1967,
Olympic and EMI studios, London
Genre
Writer(s) Lennon–McCartney
The Beatles singles chronology
Strawberry Fields Forever” / “Penny Lane
(1967)
All You Need Is Love
(1967)
Hello, Goodbye
(1967)
Magical Mystery Tour track listing

All You Need Is Love” is a song written by John Lennon[3] and credited to Lennon–McCartney. It was first performed by the Beatles on Our World, the first live global television link. Watched by over 400 million in 25 countries, the programme was broadcast via satellite on 25 June 1967.[4] The BBC had commissioned the Beatles to write a song for the United Kingdom’s contribution.

 This portion below is an article from the blog http://www.beatlesebooks.com/all-you-need-is-love

“ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE”

(John Lennon – Paul McCartney)

Sometime in early 1967, the BBC began publicizing an upcoming live television event that would be “for the first time ever, linking five continents and bringing man face to face with mankind, in places as far apart as Canberra and Cape kennedy, Moscow and Montreal, Samarkand and Soderfors, Takamatsu and Tunis.”  This ambitious program would be entitled “Our World,” the world’s first global television program, which proposed to link five continents simultaneously by satellites orbiting the earth.

Eighteen countries agreed to provide live contributions to this program with thirteen additional countries agreeing to broadcast the event (although seven countries pulled out just days before it aired).  A projected 500 million viewers were anticipated, making this the most ambitious and historic television program of its time.  In the U.S., the show was to be aired on the National Educational Television (NET) network of 113 affiliate stations.

All of the contributions to the program were to be divided into a number of sub-sections, namely “This Moment’s World,” “The Hungry World,” “The Crowded World,” “Physical Excellence,” “Artistic Excellence” and “The World Beyond.” Since the entire program was the brainchild of the BBC, the British contribution was well thought out with the intention of displaying the finest the country had to offer.

With this in mind, it was hardly a surprise to most that on May 18th, 1967, it was announced that The Beatles would be highlighted as the concluding segment of the “Artistic Excellence” section of the program, being one of two British contributions to the show.  They were to perform live in EMI Studios recording a song written especially for the occasion.  “In what has since been described, with some justification, as the greatest single moment in the history of popular music,” relates Mark Lewisohn in his book “The Complete Beatles Chronicle,”  “The Beatles, now at their absolute zenith, performed ‘All You Need Is Love’…From playing skiffle music in an abattoir workers’ social club in 1957 to instructing 350 million people, live across the globe ten years later that ‘love is all you need‘ is a leap in scale so colossal that it’s still hard to comprehend.”

Songwriting History

“Brian (Epstein) suddenly whirled in and said that we were to represent Britain in a round-the-world hook-up, and we’d got to write a song,” recalls George martin.  “It was a challenge.  We had less than two weeks to get it together, and then we learnt there were going to be over 300 million people watching, which was for those days a phenomenal figure.”

In a mid 1967 interview, Paul explained to DJ Kenny Everett, “What happened was, a fellow from the BBC, an organization which I’m sure you have heard of, asked us to get together a song for this.  So we said, ‘We’d get one together, with nice easy words, so that everyone can understand it.’  So he said, ‘Oh, all right then.  We’ll see you in a couple weeks.’  So we went away, and we just played Monopoly for a bit, and then the fellow said, ‘Now, where’s the song?’  So we said, ‘Ah! Don’t worry Derek.’  His name was Derek Burrell-Davis.  ‘We’ll soon have a song for you.’”

Geoff Emerick, in his book “Here, There And Everywhere,” gives some first-hand details about the group being introduced to the project.  “A couple of months previously, while we were still wrapped up with the job of completing ‘Pepper,’  Brian Epstein had made one of his infrequent visits to the studio.  With a grandiloquent sweep of this hands, he called for silence.  ‘Boys,’ he announced, ‘I have the most fantastic news to report.’  Everyone’s ears perked up. Brian paused for dramatic emphasis.  ‘You have been selected to represent England in a television program which, for the first time ever, will be transmitted live around the world via satellite.  The BBC shall actually be filming you making your next record.’”

“He looked around the room expectantly,” Emerick continues.  “I almost thought he was getting ready to take a bow.  To his utter dismay, the group’s response was…to yawn.  Ringo fidgeted at the back of the room, anxious to return to the game of chess he was playing with Neil (Aspinall), and George resumed tuning his guitar.  John and Paul exchanged blank looks for a moment. Paul didn’t seem all that interested; I guess he was probably just too focused on finishing up ‘Pepper.’  With a distinct lack of enthusiasm, John finally said, ‘Oh, okay.  I’ll do something for that.’”

“Brian was incensed at their casual reaction. ‘Aren’t you excited?  Don’t you realize what this means to us?  Don’t you have any idea how much hard work and effort I put into making this deal?’  Lennon cut him off with an acidic comment:  ‘Well, Brian, that’s what you get for committing us to doing something without asking us first.’  Epsteinlooked close to tears.  At a loss for words, he stomped out of the studio in a snit.  From the studio chatter that followed after he had gone.  I gathered that, rather than viewing this as a coup, the four Beatles saw it as a violation of their self-declared intent to never perform live again.  What’s more, they resented the fact that their manager had presented it to them as a fait accompli.  They were at a point where they wanted to take control of their own career.”

“With that, the issue was forgotten…until, some weeks later, during one of the ‘You Know My Name‘ sessions, Paul happened to ask John casually, ‘How are you getting on with that song for the television broadcast?  Isn’t it coming up fairly soon?’  John looked questioningly at Neil, who was the keeper of the band’s diary.  ‘Couple of weeks time, looks like,’ Neil responded after consulting his tattered book. ‘Oh God, is it that close?  Well, then I suppose I’d better write something.’”  With the above information, we can narrow down the time of writing “All You Need Is Love” as between June 7th and 14th, 1967.

Shortly before his death, Brian Epstein had this to say about the “All You Need Is Love” project:  “I’ve never had a moment’s worry that they wouldn’t come up with something marvelous. The commitment for the TV program was arranged some months ago.  The time got nearer and nearer, and they still hadn’t written anything.  Then, about three weeks before the program, they sat down to write.  The record was completed in ten days.  This is an inspired song, because they wrote it for a worldwide program and they really wanted to give the world a message.  It could hardly have been a better message.  It is a wonderful, beautiful, spine-chilling record.”

“Even The Beatles, who were seldom overawed by anything, were a bit bomb-happy about it,” George Martin relates in his book “All You Need Is Ears.”  “’But you can’t just go off the cuff,’ I pleaded with them.  ‘We’ve got to prepare something.’ So they went away to get something together, and John came up with ‘All You Need Is Love.’  It had to be kept terribly secret, because the general idea was that the television viewers would actually see The Beatles at work recording their new single…John came up with the idea of the song, which was ideal, lovely…They work best under pressure.  It is a fairly simple love song.”

“So John and I just got together,” Paul continues, “and thought and I wrote one, and John wrote one, and we went to the session and we just decided to do his first.  By the time that we had done the backing track for John’s, we suddenly realized that his was the one…So we’ve still got mine, ready to do for the next one, which is of a similar nature in its simplicity, but with a different message.” Although Paul’s intended contribution has never been confirmed, many feel it was the very next song The Beatles recorded, namely, “Your Mother Should Know.”

In his book “Many Years From Now,” Paul elaborates:  “’All You Need I Love’ was John’s song.  I threw in a few ideas, as did the other members of the group, but it was largely ad libs like singing ‘She Loves you’…or silly little things at the end and we made those up on the spot.  The chorus ‘All you need is love‘ is simple, but the verse is quite complex, in fact I never really understood it, the message is rather complex.”

George Harrison seemed to understand the lyrics, however, as he explained in the “Beatles Anthology” book about his overall experience in The Beatles:  “If we weren’t in The Beatles we would have been in something else, not necessarily another rock’n’roll band.  Karma is:  what you sow, you reap.  Like John said in ‘All You Need Is Love’:  ‘There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be,’ because you yourself have carved out your own destiny by your previous actions.  I always had a feeling that something was going to happen.”

In time, Paul’s memory began to fade as to whether the song was written especially for the event or not.  “One of those we had around at the time,” he’s said.  “I’ve got a feeling it was just one of John’s songs that was coming anyway…once we had it, it was certainly tailored to suit the program.”  It appears, however, that these blurry recollections are just the products of the passage of time since his earlier quotes, as those from many others, indicates the song being written precisely for the “Our World” program.

In any event, Ringo says it well in the book “Beatles Anthology”: “The writers of the song were masters at hitting the nail on the head!..It was for love.  It was for love and bloody peace.  It was a fabulous time.  I even get excited now when I realize that’s what it was for:  Peace and love, people putting flowers in guns.”

Recording History

“The project cam together so fast,” Geoff Emerick explains about preparing for the “All You Need Is Love” broadcast, “that George Martin was unable to book the band into any of the EMI studios, so they had to record the backing track at Olympic; once again, to my frustration.  I was unable to engineer it or even attend because I was an EMI staffer.”  The group’s recent positive experience at Olympic Studios recording “Baby You’re A Rich Man” made the choice of this studio an easy one.

With only eleven days until the television show was due for broadcast, The Beatles entered Olympic Sound Studios on June 14th, 1967 (time unknown) to record the rhythm track for “All You Need Is Love.”  In Geoff Emerick’s absence, Eddie Kramer(future producer of Jimi Hendrix and Kiss) was engineer along with George Chkiantz as tape operator and, as usual, George Martin as producer.  Eddie Kramer remembers:  “They came in and it was, ‘Well, what are we going to do now?’  John had the idea for ‘All You Need Is Love’ and he sat next to me in the control room.  We rigged the talkback mike so that it could be used for vocals, and he sang through that.”

But this was hardly a typical recording session, as John himself explained back in 1967:  “We just put a track down, because I knew the chords.  I played a harpsichordand George played a violin, because we felt like doing it like that and Paul played a double bass.  They can’t play them, so we got some nice noises coming out and then you can hear it going on, because it sounded like an orchestra, but it’s just those two playing the violin.”  Eddie Kramer recalls:  “There was a bunch of instruments left over in the studio from previous sessions, including a double-bass that Paul played.”  An invoice from that session revealed a fee of ten guineas being paid for John’s use of the harpsichord.  George Martin states:  “I remember that one of the minor problems was that George had got hold of a violin which he wanted to try to play, even though he couldn’t!”

With Ringo on his usual drum kit, the group went through a total of 33 takes of the rhythm track for the song with this unusual instrumentation, John’s vocal being the only voice heard intended as a guide vocal only.  The book “The Beatles Recording Sessions” explains, “Right from the beginning of take one ‘La Marseillaise’ (the French national anthem) was a vital part of the song, emphasizing the international flavor of the occasion.”  Engineer George Chkiantz relates:  “The Beatles were very opportunistic and very positive.  At one point we accidentally made a curious sound on the tape and they not only wanted to keep it on the recording they also asked us to deliberately repeat that same sound again.  Other groups would have been annoyed but The Beatles capitalized on the mistake.”

Eddie Kramer explains:  “They did the song from beginning to end for a good half-hour.  They’d get to the end of the song and John would count it off again without stopping, doing it again and again until they got the one that they liked.”  It was determined that ‘take 10’ was the best, so a tape reduction was prepared of this take to be brought to EMI Studios for additional recording.  “They did a four-track to four-track mixdown,” George Chkiantz continues, “with curiously little care we all thought – and George Martin specifically told me to keep any little chatter before the take began.”

Five days later (only six days to go), on June 19th, 1967, The Beatles continued work on the song in EMI Studio Three from approximately 7 pm to 1:45 am the following morning.  After the engineering staff of George Martin, Geoff Emerick and 2nd engineer Richard Lush prepared a tape copy of the previously recorded rhythm track onto track one of a new four-track tape, overdubbing began on the three open tracks.  Onto track two was recorded more drums from Ringo, a piano played by George Martin, and a banjo played by John.  Onto tracks three and four were recorded John on lead vocals and Paul and George on backing vocals.  These lead vocals from John were apparently replaced later, as we’ll see.

The first mono mix created for the song was done on June 21st, 1967 in Room 53 of EMI Studios between 4:30 and 5 pm by George Martin and engineers Malcolm Addey and Phil McDonald.  This mono mix, however, was only of the rhythm track recorded at Olympic Studios (omitting the above mentioned overdubs done on June 19th) and was documented as “remix 1.”  Later that evening, in the control room of EMI Studio Three, a similar mono mix, this one unnumbered, was prepared by the team of Martin, Emerick and Lush between the hours of 7 and 11:30 pm.  An acetate of this mono mix was given to Derek Burrell Davis, director of the BBC broadcast team, in preparation for the upcoming June 25th show.

“So then we thought, ‘Ah well, we’ll have some more orchestra around this little three-piece with a drum,’” explained John in 1967.  George Martin relates in his book “All You Need Is Ears,”  “I did a score for the song, a fairly arbitrary sort of arrangement since it was at such short notice.”  The orchestra was planned to be a part of the live television event, but they recorded a sizable portion of their contribution beforehand, on June 23rd, 1967 in EMI Studio One between 8 and 11 pm.

Since all four tracks of the four-track tape was full at this point, a tape reduction was first made on this day to open up some tracks for overdubbing purposes.  The orchestra overdubbed George Martin’s score onto this tape reduction (still stipulated as ‘take 10’) these overdubs designated as takes 34 through 43 (continuing from the 33 initial takes The Beatles made at Olympic Studios on June 14th).

Around this time, some very brave decisions were made regarding the actual live broadcast.  “In a fit of bravado,” relates Geoff Emerick, “Lennon announced that he was going to do his lead vocal live during the broadcast, which prompted the ever competitive Paul to respond that if John was going to do that, he would play bass live, too.  It seemed to me to be a foolhardy – though brave – decision.  What if one of them sang or played a bad note in front of millions of viewers?  But they were supremely confident, and they could not be dissuaded by George Martin, who was adamantly opposed, but as was usual by this point, had no real authority.”

“In an act of further defiance,” Emerick continues, “John and Paul even talked George Harrison into doing his guitar solo live, which we all knew was a tricky proposition.  To my surprise, Harrison gave in without a whole lot of argument; my sense was that he was afraid of being embarrassed in front of his bandmates.  Only Ringo was completely safe, for technical reasons:  if the drums were played live, there would be too much leakage onto the microphones that were going to be picking up the sound of the orchestra.  Ringo nodded his head solemnly when I explained that to him.  I couldn’t tell whether he was relieved at being absolved of the responsibility of playing live, or whether he felt left out.”

The next day, June 24th, 1967 (the day before The Big Event), EMI Studios decided to forego their usual ‘closed door’ policy and allow more than 100 journalists and photographers inside throughout the late morning.  Then, from 2 to 4 pm, a camera rehearsal for the following day’s events took place in EMI Studio One, which included The Beatles, the thirteen members of the orchestra and Mike Vickers, a former member of the Manfred Mann band who was recruited to conduct the orchestra (since George Martin would be too busy in the control room on that day).

It was during this rehearsal that managerBrian Epstein “came in and held a meeting with George Martin and the band,” Geoff Emerick recalls, “during which they debated the wisdom of rush-releasing the upcoming performance as a single.  John, of course, was keen – it was his song, after all – and it didn’t take much effort to talk Paul into it, either…Only George Harrison was reluctant; presumably he was worried that he might muff his solo, even though it was only four bars long.  He was finally persuaded when George Martin assured him that we could stay late afterward and do any necessary repair work.”

Geoff Emerick noticed something interesting happening during these camera rehearsals.  “I noticed George Harrison engaged in conversation with the television director for quite a long time.  I had no idea what they were talking about, but I did notice during the broadcast that the camera was not trained on George during his guitar solo.  Perhaps he requested that specifically, either because he didn’t have confidence in his playing, or because he felt it was likely that he would replace the part later.”

After this camera rehearsal was complete, four more takes of overdubbing (takes 44 – 47) were recorded for “All You Need Is Love” in preparation for this days’ decision to release the song as The Beatles next single as soon after the broadcast as possible.  Although we don’t know for sure what these overdubs consisted of, Geoff Emerick’s book “Here, There And Everywhere” may shed some light on this.  “Adding to the chaos was John’s insistence on making a last minute change to the arrangement, which sentGeorge Martin into a tizzy – he was doing the orchestral score and had to rapidly come up with new sheet music for the musicians, who milled around impatiently waiting for him.  To his credit, George came up with a spectacular arrangement, especially considering the very limited time he had to do it in and the odd meters that characterized the song.”  These overdubs took place in EMI Studio One between 5 and 8 pm, they all leaving then to get a good night’s rest before the eventful next day.

The day of reckoning arrived; June 25th, 1967.  The Beatles, the orchestra, the engineering team, the BBC crew and everyone else involved arrived at EMI Studio One at around 2 pm for what became an arduous and nerve-wracking day of activity.  Much rehearsal (all recorded) and trouble-shooting was needed before the live transmission would take place later that evening.

“The day of the performance came,” George Martin explains, “with television cameras rolling into the big Number One studio at Abbey Road.  But I was still worried about the idea of going out totally live.  So I told the boys:  ‘We’re going to hedge our bets.  This is how we’ll do it.  I’ll have a four-track machine standing by, and when we go on the air I’ll play you the rhythm track, which you’ll pretend to be playing.  But your voices and the orchestra will really be live, and we’ll mix the whole thing together and transmit it to the waiting world like that.’ The BBC’s mobile control unit was set up in the forecourt at Abbey Road, and I was to feed them the mix from our control room inside the studios.  Geoff Emerick, my engineer, was sitting right next to me but, even so, communication was rather hampered by the fact that a television camera was sitting right over us, watching our every move.”

At some point, possibly during these rehearsals, another last minute addition was made to the orchestral score.  “George Martin…wrote the end of ‘All You Need Is Love,” Paul explains.  “It was a hurried session and we said, ‘There’s the end, we want it to go on and on.’  Actually, what he wrote was much more disjoined, so when we put all the bits together, we said, ‘Could we have “Greensleeves” right on top of the little Bach thing?’  And on top of that, we had the ‘In The Mood’ bit.”  Trumpeter David Mason remembers, “We played bits of Bach’s Brandenburg concerto in the fade-out.”

“When it came to the end of their fade-away as the song closed,” George Martin relates, “I asked them:  ‘How do you want to get out of it?’  ‘Write absolutely anthing you like, George,’ they said.  ‘Put together any tunes you fancy, and just play it out like that.’  The mixture I came up with was culled from the ‘Marseillaise,’ a Bach two-part invention,  ‘Greensleeves,’ and the little lick from ‘In The Mood.’  I wove them all together, at slightly different tempos so that they all still worked as separate entities.”

But there was only one problem with this arrangement.  “Unfortunately, there was a sting in the tail for me,” George Martin continues. “I was being paid the princely sum of fifteen pounds for arranging the music and writing the bits for the…ending, and I had chosen the tunes for the mixture in the belief that they were all out of copyright.  More fool me.  It turned out that although ‘In The Mood’ itself was out of copyright, the Glenn Miller arrangement of it was not.  The little bit I had chosen was the arrangement, not the tune itself, and as a result EMI were asked by its owners for a royalty.  The Beatles, quite rightly I suppose, said:  ‘We’re not going to give up our copyright royalty.’  SoKen East, the man who had by then become managing director of EMI Records, came to me and said:  “Look here, George, you did the arrangement on this.  They’re expecting money for it.’ ‘You must be out of your mind,’ I said.  ‘I get fifteen pounds for doing that arrangement.  Do you mean to say I’ve got to pay blasted copyright out of my fifteen quid?’  His answer was short and unequivocal.  ‘Yes.’  In the end, of course, EMI had to settle with the publishers.”

Three rehearsal takes were recorded first (takes 48 – 50), then three rehearsal takes for the BBC were recorded (numbered 1 – 3), then back to more dry run rehearsals (takes 51-53).  “Paul had requested a working microphone so that he could shout out ad-libs,” remembers Geoff Emerick.  “The problem was that the mic I had set up blocked Paul’s face on the camera angle they wanted to use.  In the end, I acceded to the director’s request that a smaller mic be substituted even thought it was not the mic I would normally have employed.  I felt it was unlikely that whatever Paul ended up ad-libbing would be of significant importance to the record, and even if it turned out that it was, it was something we could easily overdub later.

“Lennon was very nervous that day too,” recalls engineer Richard Lush.  “He might not have looked it but I was used to working with him and you get to know when someone is nervous.”  Geoff Emerick concurs:  “Richard and I were both struck by how visibly nervous John was, which was quite unusual for him:  we’d never seen him wound up so tightly.  He was smoking like a chimney and swigging directly from a pint bottle of milk, despite warnings from George Martin that it was bad for his voice – advice that Lennon studiously ignored.  One time as I passed by, I heard John mumbling to himself, ‘Oh, God, I hope I get the words right.’  On this night he was forced to rely on his memory because his ever-present lyric sheet had to be placed off to the side due to the camera angle; if he turned his head to consult it, he’d be singing off-mike.”

There apparently was an hour or two break from rehearsals which allowed the engineering crew to leave for a well deserved dinner.  When they arrived back at around 6 pm, they saw that a large group of celebrity friends had arrived for the broadcast, all dressed in the colorful clothes of the day.  According to reports, these friends included Mick Jagger, Marianne Faithfull, Keith Richard, Keith Moon, Eric Clapton, Pattie Harrison, Jane Asher, Mike McCartney, Graham Nash, Gary Leeds, Hunter Davies, Terry Condon, Allistair Taylor and Brian Epstein.  “I had Keith Moon next to me,” Ringo remembers.  “We decided to get some people in who looked like the ‘love generation’,” George Harrison recalls.  “If you look closely at the floor, I know that Mick Jagger is there.  But there’s also an Eric Clapton, I believe, in full psychedelic regalia and permed hair, sitting right there.”

Author George Gunby, in his book “Hello Goodbye, The Story Of ‘Mr. Fixit’,” recounts the eyewitness recollections of Brian Epstein’s assistant Allistair Taylor:  “Throughout the afternoon and early evening the musicians and technicians rehearsed constantly.  It must have been the most rehearsed spontaneous performance ever!  The party guests arrived…they sat on the studio floor and waited as the clock ticked remorselessly towards 9:30 pm, the time set for the live transmission.  Despite the relaxing effects of the ‘whacky baccy’ being smoked throughout the studio and the building, tempers became frayed and nerves raw.  Then John threw everything out of kilter by claiming that he had lost his voice.  Paul laughed at him and gently ribbed his songwriting partner.  A glass of water and a few more barbed comments from McCartney put things right.”

“Paul strode into the control room at one point,” Geoff Emerickstates, “and spent some time working on the bass sound with me.  It struck me as a smart thing to do.  Not only was he making certain that his instrument would come across the way he wanted it to, but getting out of the studio, away from the others and out of the line of fire, had a calming effect on both of us.  It gave us both a little sanctuary where we could focus on just one specific thing and not think about the monumental technical feat we would soon be attempting to pull off.”

Four more rehearsal takes were recorded (takes 54 – 57) while they were waiting for the cue from the BBC that they were ready for broadcast.  After some last minute technical problems regarding lost communication with the BBC truck parked outside (and the frantic hiding of glasses and a bottle of scotch in the control room during a last minute toast between the engineering crew), the intercom speaker unexpectedly proclaimed “Going on air…NOW!”  The live broadcast caught ‘take 57’ of their rehearsal midstream, which was duly interrupted by George Martin in the control room, thanking The Beatles for their work on the “vocal backing,” and instructing the tape operator:  “Run back the tape please, Richard.”  While the group waited for the tape to be rewound and cued up, and in between announcer Steve Race’s comments to the viewing audience, The Beatles were heard nervously goofing around with their instruments with John singing “She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah.” (During rehearsals, John is also heard singing “Yesterday” and “She’ll Be Coming Round The Mountain When She Comes.”)

After John takes a sip of milk, roadie Mal Evans collects some empty tea cups, and the orchestra enters into the studio and takes their seats, the previously recorded tape is cued up and begins to be played.  So starts ‘take 58,’ the official take of the song for the “Our World” broadcast which spanned the globe thanks to the Early Bird ‘space booster’ and Lana Bird and ATS/B satellites.

The make-up of the four-track tape was as follows:  ‘Track One’ contained the prerecorded rhythm track, ‘Track Two’ contained the live bass guitar, lead guitar and drums (they ended up being miked in order for Ringo to perform a live snare drum roll at the beginning of the song), ‘Track Three’ had the live orchestra, and ‘Track Four’ had the live vocals from John and Paul.

“The Beatles themselves gave an inspiring performance,” Geoff Emerick relates, “though you could see the look of relief on all their faces as they got to the fadeout and realized that they’d actually pulled it off.  John came through like a trouper, delivering an amazing vocal despite his nervousness and the plug of chewing gum in his mouth that he forgot to remove just before we went on air.  Paul’s playing, as always, was solid, with no gaffs, and even George Harrison’s solo was reasonably good, though he did hit a clunker at the end. Unsurprisingly, despite the complicated score and tricky time changes, the orchestral players came through like the pros they were, with no fluffs whatsoever, even on the most demanding brass riffs.”

Shortly after the momentous broadcast was complete, the engineers took off to the nearby Abbey Tavern for a celebratory drink while the orchestra, BBC crew and all the guests left for the evening.  When they got back just before 11 pm, they worked with George Martin and maintenance engineer Martin Benge to put the finishing touches on the song in preparation for the soon-to-be-released single.

Geoff Emerick relates:  “From the very first playback, the four Beatles were knocked out by what they were hearing.  Harrison winced a little during his guitar solo, butRichard (Lush) took the initiative and reassured him, saying, ‘It’ll be fine; we’ll put a little wobble on it and it will be great.’ In the end, all we had to do was add the effect and duck the last bad note.”  John related at the time:  “There was no conception about how it should sound like at the end until we did it that day.”

Emerick continues:  “John’s vocal needed only two lines dropped in in the second verse, where, sure enough, he flubbed a lyric.  The only other remaining task was to redo the snare drum roll that Ringo played in the song’s introduciotn; it had been a last-minute decision for him to do it live during the broadcast, and George Martin felt it could be done a bit better…The only things that were replaced on ‘All You Need Is Love’ for the record release were the snare roll at the beginning, and two lines of the lead vocal.”  After these overdubs took place, the studio doors were finally shut by around 1 am the following morning.

Later that day, June 26th, 1967, the engineering team of Martin, Emerick and Lush entered the control room of EMI Studio Two refreshed and ready to create the releasable mono mix of the song.  While mixing out John’s tambourine shaking at the beginning of the song, they made nine attempts at creating this crucial mix, only five of which were complete.  Their fourth attempt was deemed the best, this being given to a young Ken Scott (who was apprenticing as a mastering engineer and would become a sought after producer in his own right) to be transferred to vinyl.  “Funnily enough,” stated George Martin, “although John had added a new vocal, Ringo had added a drum roll and we had done a new mix, few people realized the single was any different to the TV version of the song.”

There was no intention to put out “All You Need Is Love” on an album at this point, so no stereo version was prepared yet.  Capitol Records, however, did intend to include the song on their makeshift album “Magical Mystery Tour” so, with only the mono version available, they created a fake-stereo version of the song (probably in late October of 1967) for their stereo version of the album, placing the treble frequencies on one channel and the bass frequencies on the other channel.

On November 1st, 1967, the same engineering team of Martin, Emerick and Lush met in Room 53 of EMI Studios between 10 am and 1 pm to create a couple new mono mixes for songs that were to appear in the soundtrack to the upcoming “Yellow Submarine” movie, “All You Need Is Love” being one of them.  This new mix, noted as remix 11, clipped off the last 13 seconds of the song, which omitted the final reprise of “Greensleeves” as heard on the released single.

In preparation for the soundtrack album release of “Yellow Submarine,” a stereo mix of “All You Need Is Love” was now deemed necessary.  This was done on October 29th, 1968 in the control room of EMI Studio Three by Geoff Emerick and 2nd engineer Graham Kirkby (no producer was present).  There are many notable differences between this stereo mix and the released mono mix.  In this stereo mix, the brass is quieter, the drums are louder, the piano is heard more prominently, and a voice that appears to say “Check!” is heard at about the 25 second mark.  George’s guitar solo is a little quieter here and has a little less of the “wobble” effect.  This guitar solo also cuts off just after the flubbed note in the fifth measure in the mono mix while it continues to be heard throughout the fifth and sixth measure in this stereo mix.  The stereo mix is also substantially shorter that the released mono mix, also omitting the second playing of “Greensleeves.”

Sometime in early 1999, a brand new mix of “All You Need Is Love” was created in EMI Studios for the album “Yellow Submarine Songtrack” which was put together to coincide with the re-release of the film that year. This new vibrant mix has the “Check!” voice panned out and also has the earlier fade as the previous stereo mix does. This mix was created by the engineering team of Peter Cobbin, Paul Hicks, Mirek Stiles andAllan Rouse.

Also, sometime presumably in early 2006, George Martin and son Giles Martin met in EMI Studios (now Abbey Road Studios) to create yet another stereo mix of “All You Need Is Love” for the album and project “Love.” This mix is generally the same as the original stereo mix until the fade out which combines elements of “Baby You’re A Rich Man,” “Rain, “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band” and “Ticket To Ride.” The song then ends with a combination of the orchestration of the song “Goodnight” and the sign off on their “Third Christmas Record.”

Giles Martin then created yet another stereo mix of “All You Need Is Love” in Abbey Road Studios, along with Sam Okell, for inclusion on the re-release of the compilation album “Beatles 1.”

Song Structure and Style

For a song that was intended for an international audience, John kept to a simple song structure, this being ‘(introductory) verse/ verse/ verse/ chorus/ (instrumental) verse/ chorus/ verse/ chorus/ chorus’ (or aaabababb) with a short introduction and long meandering conclusion thrown in.  However, time signature changes abound as is sporadically usual on Lennon compositions in his later Beatles output.

A short three-measure introduction is heard first which mostly comprises the orchestra playing “La Marseillaise” along with Ringo’s overdubbed snare drum roll.  Lennon also played this French National Anthem on harpsichord during the initial rhythm track but it is virtually, if not totally, indecipherable on the finished product.  This introduction sets the 4/4 meter as a template for the rest of the song.

The first eight-measure verse then begins which is actually just used as an introduction, the only vocals being the words “love, love, love” repeated three times in harmony by John, Paul and George.  The second, fourth and eighth measures are in ¾ time while the rest are in the usual 4/4 time, this pattern being repeated in all the verses of the entire song.  John’s harpsichord appears in earnest at this point playing simple chords throughout the verse while Ringo taps out quarter-note snare drum beats along with John.  The violins kick in starting from the fifth measure and play throughout this verse while George squeaks out a few guitar notes in the final measures.  We can also detect faint tambourine beats played by John from the live broadcast.

The first proper verse starts afterwards as Paul’s bass guitar bounces in and John’s lead vocals wind throughout.  The “love, love, love” backing vocals are still present as are the strings playing nearly the same arrangement as in the introductory verse.  There are some unidentified percussion-like sounds heard throughout this verse that possibly were made by George on violin in the rhythm track (or from John’s banjo overdub).  The second vocal verse comes next which is quite similar to the previous one except for a more elaborate orchestral arrangement, a combination of the prerecorded score with a different live broadcast score.  We can also hear George playing some actual bowed violin in the final measure.

The first chorus then appears, which is also eight measures long.  All of the measures are in 4/4 time except for the eighth measure which is in 2/4.  John’s lead vocal is double-tracked throughout the chorus while the verses are all single-tracked.  Lennon’s is the only voice heard in this chorus while the orchestral score plays a much more melodic and dominant role, mimicking in part what John originally played on the harpsichord in the rhythm track.  Lennon’s live tambourine is also heard somewhat more prominently in this chorus.

The next verse that follows is used as the instrumental section of the song, the first four measures highlighted by George’s live guitar solo, the flubbed chord heard at the beginning of the fifth measure.  The “love, love, love” backing vocals reappear here as the orchestra continues to be featured dramatically, especially with the staccato sixteenth-notes heard in the seventh measure.  The tambourine is still present throughout as is George’s violin noodling in the eighth measure.  The second chorus then follows which is primarily identical to the first chorus except for Paul’s adlib “whoop”s heard in the third and fourth measure.

The final verse then appears which now features an engaging string arrangement not heard before.  The backing vocals now sing the single word “love” held out three times and George’s violin is heard playing a triplet-like pattern in the final measure which briefly continues on into the chorus that follows it.

The chorus is now repeated twice, the orchestral arrangement altering once again from the choruses previously heard.  Various additional elements are heard here, including an accordion, George Martin’s barrel-house piano playing, backing vocals from Paul and George, and more fluid bass work from McCartney.  The last chorus is noteworthy for featuring Paul’s “all together now” in the second measure and “everybody” in the fourth measure.  The strings climax in the fifth through eighth measures by playing ascending triplet patterns until they reach their highest pitch in the eighth measure which is then played with a swing beat into the first four measures of the conclusion.

This conclusion consists of 30 measures in the common stereo version and 34 measures in the mono version.  Vocally, this conclusion consists of John repeating “love is all you need” with a prerecorded John, Paul and George harmonizing the same line afterwards continually in a ‘row, row, row your boat’ fashion.  This vocalization continues this way until the twelfth measure, Paul yelling “woo-hoo” in the eleventh measure which encourages John to reply “yee-hay!”  The prerecorded harmony vocals of John, Paul and George continue through the rest of the song but, with John’s solo vocals abandoned, it allows him to adlib whatever came to mind, singing “Yesterday” in the 14th measure and shouting “Woah!” in the 15th measure.  Paul shouts “Oh yeah” in the 17th and 18th measures which prompts John to sing “She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah” twice within measures 19 and 22.  Paul yells “woo-hoo” both in measures 24 and 25 and an “ah” in measure 26, after which we hear some indecipherable mumblings until the song fades away.

Orchestral insertions in the conclusion consist of David Mason playing Bach’s “Brandenburg Concerto” in measures five through eight, tenor saxophonists playing the introduction to “In The Mood” in measures nine and ten and then again in measures twelve and thirteen. The strings play “Greensleeves” for the first time in measures 15 through 20, which is quickly followed by David Mason’s repeat of “Brandenburg Concerto” in measures 20 through 24. Then comes “In The Mood” two more times in measures 24 and 25 and then 27 and 28. Then, as heard in the mono mix, “Greensleeves” is repeated through measures 29 through 34 until the recording finally fades away.

As was usually the case, John puts in a stellar performance for one of his own compositions, propelling the proceedings with his harpsichord work from the rhythm track.  His vocal work is performed with great aplomb and his tambourine is simple but nicely done.  We can’t exactly say the same thing for his banjo playing since it’s buried too far in the mix.  Paul’s bowed double-bass isn’t very discernible either, but his bass guitar is proficiently performed as is his backing vocals.  George’s nerves brought out a suitable live guitar solo for the recording and even his violin playing wasn’t too bad. Ringo’s role may have been rudimentary but his overdubbed snare roll worked very nicely.  George Martin’s piano work in the final choruses are up to his usual high standards and are placed suitably low in the mix as not to detract from the simple message of the song.  Coming off of the extravagant production of the “Sgt. Pepper” album, they still knew how to pull out all the stops to create a full and impressive arrangement to define the “summer of love” mentality of 1967.

US picture sleeve.

American Releases

America had to wait a little over three weeks from the “Our World” broadcast to be able to purchase the “All You Need Is Love” single, which was released on July 17th, 1967.  It only took five weeks on the Billboard charts to reach the #1 spot.  Even though it only stayed at the summit for a single week (toppled by “Ode To Bille Joe” by Bobbie Gentry), it stayed in the top three of the singles chart for an impressive five weeks.  Probably because of this being a rushed release, the single’s b-side “Baby You’re A Rich Man” was given a lower suffix numbe, resulting in “All You Need Is Love” being placed on the “sliced apple” b-side when the single was re-released in the 70’s.

The song appeared on an American album for the first time only a few months later, on November 27th, 1967, on the Capitol concocted release “Magical Mystery Tour.”  Since a stereo mix of the song didn’t exist at this time, the stereo copies of this album included a fake-stereo mix that separated the bass and treble frequencies.  This album was first released on compact disc (now with the true stereo mix) on September 21st, 1987 and then on a remastered re-release on September 9th, 2009.

January 13th, 1969, was the next release of the song on the soundtrack album to the movie “Yellow Submarine.”  This album featured the newly created stereo mix which was noticeably shorter than the version we all were used to hearing before this time.  The first compact disc version of this album was released on October 25th, 1987 and then in a remastered condition on September 9th, 2009.

April 2nd, 1973, saw the release of the first official set of “greatest hits” packages by The Beatles, “All You Need Is Love” being contained on “The Beatles/1967-1970” (aka “The Blue Album”).  This album first appeared on compact disc on September 20th, 1993 and then as a remastered set on August 10th, 2010.

The next release of the song was on October 15th, 1982 on the single album “20 Greatest Hits.”  Then in February of 1994, Capitol Cema re-released the single on pink vinyl as a “for jukebox only” 45.  Then came the newly mixed version of the song as released on the album “Yellow Submarine Songtrack,” which was released on September 13th, 1999.  This was followed by the November 14th, 2000 release of the album “Beatles 1,”  “All You Need Is Love” earning its spot here because of its topping the charts in both Britain and America. This album was released in a remastered condition in September of 2011, and then as a remixed album on November 6th, 2015.

Next came the album “Love,” released on November 21st, 2006, which featured a newly created mash-up mix of the song featuring elements of many other Beatles songs during its conclusion (as described above).  And if die-hard fans felt that the original lengthened mono mix of “All You Need Is Love” had gotten lost in the shuffle, the box set “The Beatles In Mono” rectified the situation, this set being released on September 9th, 2009.

Live Performances

Even though The Beatles retired from live performances in the end of the summer of 1966, their June 25th, 1967 “Our World” broadcast of “All You Need Is Love” (as detailed above) is the nearest to a live show the group put on in nearly a year.  Some may also point to the song’s inclusion in the 1968 animated film “Yellow Submarine” as a performance of sorts, and therefore it is also acknowledged here as well.

Surprisingly, Paul McCartney decided to include a medley of two Beatles songs with a similar lyrical theme, both considered Lennon staples, on his lengthy “On The Run” tour.  Paul and his band performed the entire song “The Word” and then finished it off with a three-time repeated chorus of “All You Need Is Love,” complete with his ad-libs “all together now,” “everybody” and a full fledged Beatle harmonized “she loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah” to end the performance.  This obviously brought the house down in all the venues he decided to perform this at, which included most of the European leg of the tour, spanning from November 26th, 2011 (Bologna, Italy) to March 28th, 2012 (Antwerp, Belgium).  For some reason, Paul decided not to perform this medley in North America, South America or Asia.

Conclusion

“Well, I’m really glad that most of the songs dealt with love, peace, understanding…You know, it really did.  If you look back there’s hardly any of ’em that says, ‘Go on, kes, tell ’em all to sod off, leave your parents.’  It’s all very, ‘All You Need Is Love,’ John’s ‘Give Peace A Chance.’  There’s a very good spirit behind it all.”

This quote from Paul McCartney during the interviews from the Anthology documentary sums up nicely how the song “All You Need Is Love” was viewed by the group as the overall message The Beatles were trying to convey to the world. They weren’t trying to subvert the morals of young minds in the sixties, as many thought. They were just being themselves, artistically expressing their honest thoughts and/or beliefs at any given time.  George described the song as “a kind of subtle bit of PR for God, basically.”

While the sentiments of “All You Need Is Love” weren’t overtly political, the message can easily be interpreted as a salve for any unrest of any age if all the complications could somehow be stripped away.  It reveals the underlying truth that inner peace needs to be attained first for each one of us individually before a bigger universal picture can emerge.  “You can learn to be YOU in time,” John sings, instead of being who you are conditioned to be from your societal and/or religious upbringing onward.  It may appear to be a herculean task to accomplish this but, promises John, “It’s easy!”  And, once this is done on an individual basis, our united focus on true unadulterated “love” can accomplish anything.

“I still believe ‘All You Need Is Love,’ you know,” John related many years later, “but I don’t believe that just saying it is gonna do it.  You know, I mean, I still believe in the fact that love is what we all need.”

Song Summary

All You Need Is Love

Written by: John Lennon / Paul McCartney

  • Song Written: June, 1967 
  • Song Recorded: June 14, 19, 23, 24, 25, 1967
  • First US Release Date: July 17, 1967
  • US Single Release: Capitol #5964
  • Highest Chart Position: #1 (1 week)
  • First US Album Release: Capitol #SMAL-2835 “Magical Mystery Tour
  • British Album Release: Apple #PCS7070 “Yellow Submarine”
  • Length: 3:57 (mono) 3:48 (stereo)
  • Key: G major
  • Producer: George Martin
  • Engineers: Geoff Emerick, Eddie Kramer, Richard Lush, George Chkiantz, Martin Benge

Instrumentation (most likely):

  • John Lennon – Lead and Backing Vocals, Harpsichord, Banjo, tambourine
  • Paul McCartney – Bass (1964 Rickenbacker 4001 S), Double-bass, backing vocals
  • George Harrison – Violin, Guitar (1961 Sonic Blue Fender Stratocaster, painted psychedelic), backing vocals
  • Ringo Starr – Drums (1964 Ludwig Super Classic Black Oyster Pearl)
  • George Martin – Piano (Hamburg Steinway Baby Grand)
  • Sidney Sax – Voilin
  • Patrick Halling – Violin
  • Eric Bowie – Violin
  • Jack Holmes – Violin
  • Rex Morris – Tenor Saxophone
  • Don Honeywill – Tenor Saxophone
  • Evan Watkins – Trombone
  • Harry Spain – Trombone
  • Jack Emblow – Accordion
  • Stanley Woods – Trumpet, Flugelhorn
  • David Mason – Piccolo Trumpet
  • Keith Moon – Percussion 
  • Assorted Guests – Handclaps

How Should We then Live Episode 7 

Artist featured today is  Shirazeh Houshiary

Contemporary Christian Art – The Rt Revd Lord Harries of Pentregarth

 

 

Published on Apr 10, 2012

Contrary to much opinion, the current scene of faith-related art is very much alive. There are new commissions for churches and cathedrals, a number of artists pursue their work on the basis of a deeply convinced faith, and other artists often resonate with traditional Christian themes, albeit in a highly untraditional way. The challenge for the artist, stated in the introduction to the course of lectures above, is still very much there: how to retain artistic integrity whilst doing justice to received themes.

This lecture is part of Lord Harries’ series on ‘Christian Faith and Modern Art’. The last century has seen changes in artistic style that have been both rapid and radical. This has presented a particular problem to artists who have wished to express Christian themes.

The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:
http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and…

Gresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website.
http://www.gresham.ac.uk

SHIRAZEH HOUSHIARY: ‘LIKE THE DARK SENSES BEING REVEALED’

 

BY Elizabeth Fullerton POSTED 05/22/13 7:00 AM

Mystical and metaphysical, Shirazeh Houshiary’s sculptures, paintings, and animations explore the very nature of existence

143  39  2  1815

Shirazeh Houshiary. “I don’t want to fit into any category,” she says. “I want to be an individual.”

SHANNON OKSANEN/COURTESY THE ARTIST AND LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

With light streaming in through large skylights and classical music filling the space under the vaulted roof, the Iranian-born artist Shirazeh Houshiary’s immaculate white London studio feels more like a chapel than an artist’s workspace. Entering the building, the visitor has the sense of stepping out of time. It is a fitting setting for an artist whose paintings, sculptures, and animations are profoundly meditative and concerned with the metaphysical.

This ambience derives partly from Houshiary’s own quiet composure and partly from the nature of her work. “I’m trying to really get beyond what we experience with the three-dimensional senses we have, because we see the world in a limited way. Much of reality is what we don’t see,” says the artist, who was born in Iran and came to Britain in 1974.Houshiary, 58, does not practice any religion and dislikes such labels as “transcendental,” yet her work has an undeniably spiritual quality, overtly so with installations such as Breath, a white glazed-brick tower emitting chants from four religions that was erected in Battery Park in Manhattan in 2004, and her 2008 East Window for St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square in London.Despite these prominent projects and her participation in a steady stream of international exhibitions, Houshiary has a low public profile. This too may have to do with the nature of her output. “Shirazeh’s work has a quiet power to attract contemplation—it’s slow burn,” says Vivien Lovell, director of the art consultancy Modus Operandi, which organized the commission for East Window and the altar of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, both awarded to Houshiary and her British architect husband, Pip Horne.

Houshiary and Horne’s window for St. Martin-in-the Fields, London, 2008.

DAVE MORGAN/COURTESY LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

On the walls of the upper floor of the studio hang two recently completed canvases in mottled purples, radiant whites, blues, and black, destined for her solo show in November at Lehmann Maupin Gallery in New York. Poetic and primeval, these works at once suggest exploding galaxies in vast swirling cosmic spaces and the ribbed contours of minute cellular structures—like satellite pictures of tumultuous weather patterns or microscopic images of skin tissue.

One canvas, titled Dark Senses, in dusty purple on black, is bisected by a vaporous trail of handprints, marking a departure for the artist—an attempt to capture the elusive quality of human presence through physical touch. “It is almost like some hand mark that is really touching something very distant like the universe, like the dark senses being revealed,” says Houshiary.Creating the paintings is an act that involves the artist’s whole body, as she moves around within the reinforced canvas on the floor, overlaying several coats of pigment, on top of which she traces an intricate filigree in pencil. The combination produces a smoky, layered effect that gives the illusion of dimensions beyond the flat picture plane.For the past 20 years, she has been weaving a silvery web across all her paintings. It is made up of two words in Arabic repeated thousands of times: “I am” and “I am not.” Crushed together, so minuscule as to be indecipherable, the words embody the duality of existence in the same way as the yin and the yang. “It’s the overlapping of the two words, being and not being, life and death,” explains Houshiary. “It’s not about meaning. The relationship between the absence and presence is unknowable and leads to infinite possibility.”The paintings take two to six months to create—perhaps another reason for Houshiary’s low public profile. “You’re aware when you see the work of the amount of time that’s put into each one and that’s given back to you when you’re looking at it; the mark making almost denotes time,” says Jenni Lomax, director of the Camden Arts Centre, which gave Houshiary a solo show in 1993.Finished paintings are shipped only at the last possible moment, because Houshiary likes to live with them and learn from them. “They have their own presence and they teach me a lot,” she says.Nominated for the Turner Prize in 1994, Houshiary began her career as a sculptor and came later to painting and multimedia installation. In the 1980s, she was linked to the so-called New British Sculptors such as Anish Kapoor, Richard Deacon, and Tony Cragg, but unlike many of them, Houshiary has eschewed the limelight.Collected by museums ranging from Tate, the Museum of Modern Art, and the Guggenheim, she has taken part in major group shows worldwide and had numerous solo exhibitions at the Lisson Gallery in London and Lehmann Maupin in New York, which both represent her, and where her paintings go for $30,000 to $300,000, sculptures $150,000 to $500,000, and animations $50,000 to $250,000. But she has yet to have a retrospective at a big-name institution.Despite the fashion for identity politics among some curators, Houshiary refuses to ally herself with any ethnic group. While her textual patterns have been compared to Arabic calligraphy and her ritualistic creative process has been seen as an embodiment of Sufism, the mystical strand of Islam, she is fiercely resistant to attempts to classify her art and is careful about the shows in which she takes part.Indeed, the only time a flash of anger ruffles her calm demeanor during several hours in the studio is when she talks about Tate’s interpretation of her work Veil (which the museum owns) as a reference to the chador, the all-enveloping black robe worn by many Muslim women. “That’s all they can see of the people who come from the Middle East—they have to be oppressed,” she says. “I don’t want to fit into any category. I want to be an individual, with a mind and ideas, who can connect to the bigger picture of who we are as human beings.”Born in Shiraz in 1955, Houshiary went to school and university in Iran. Even in her native country, she says, she felt like an outsider, wanting no part of the brewing revolution that erupted in 1979, five years after she moved to England to study at the Chelsea School of Art. She has returned to Iran only twice; the lack of democracy, in politics and in the home, depresses her.“I don’t want to deny my roots. My Persian heritage is definitely there,” she says. “It’s not something I need to defend or fight for. It’s just there.” But she feels more connection with her adopted country than with her homeland.She has been with her English husband since they met as students in the 1970s. They share the studio in the leafy West London suburb of Barnes, walking there from home every day along the Thames, far from the industrial east where most of London’s artists live.The studio, designed by Horne, reflects the scope of Houshiary’s activities, with the upper loft space dedicated to painting, the ground floor to sculpture, and the basement to animation. In the entire building, virtually the only traces of her roots are a pair of Persian slippers and a book on the Sufi mystic poet Rumi, nestled in her crowded shelves among scientific tomes by Stephen Hawking, poetry by Keats and Rilke, and numerous books on art, with subjects ranging from Kazimir Malevich andBarnett Newman to Velázquez. On the floor of the studio, more books—on Leonardo da Vinci, Piero della Francesca, and Francisco de Zurbarán—lie open or in piles alongside computerized sketches for sculptures in coral, rust, and turquoise.The art historian Mel Gooding sees a strong resonance in Houshiary’s abstract painting and sculpture in terms of rhythm, structure, and color with the works of many Renaissance masters, despite their predominantly religious subject matter.“I was aware with Antonello da Messina and Fra Angelico especially that she was clearly looking, as she does all the time, at the Western European tradition of painting,” Gooding says. “We are not talking about any kind of Christian imagery, we’re talking about a set of formal ideas that has to do with an art that seeks revelation rather than description.”The concept of the veil is in fact fundamental to Houshiary’s work, but it has nothing to do with Islam, women, oppression, or Christian marriage ceremonies. Veils, shrouds, and membranes are a recurring motif; for her, the veil is the skin separating the human interior and exterior, and it is also a metaphor for perception, representing a barrier that needs to be broken through for us to achieve awareness of our being.“My recent work has had a lot of quality of rupture and piercing and chasm, so it’s like a quest to go beyond the veil that stops us seeing through,” Houshiary says, pointing to her painting Chasm, due to appear in November at Lehmann Maupin, with a milky spatial mist over a black background punctured with intense blue gashes that draw in the viewer.

Chasm, 2012, expresses “a quest to go beyond the veil.”

DAVE MORGAN/©SHIRAZEH HOUSHIARY/COURTESY LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

If her work prompts analogies with science as well as metaphysics, it’s no accident; she is deeply interested in quantum physics and intrigued by the uncertain nature of existence. “The universe is in a process of disintegration, everything is in a state of erosion, and yet we try to stabilize it,” she says. “This tension fascinates me and it’s at the core of my work.”

Moving from her painting area down to the ground floor, Houshiary points to a pink tower sculpture of anodized aluminium bricks titled Sheer, whose hard, spiraling surface shimmers and ripples, suggesting—in an apparent trick of alchemy—a soft veil twisting in the wind. Whereas her early towers were grand symmetrical columns, these latest versions have been distorted and shrunk down to chest height as a way of exploring her other central theme, life’s intrinsic polarity.“It is as if the same object is constructed and collapsed simultaneously, and actually these works are really about the space inside,” Houshiary says, her hands running over the smooth bricks. “By stretching, by pulling, just like a veil, you’re trying to transcend the three-dimensional space, similar to what I do in my painting.” Three of these sculptures are being made in colored glass bricks for the exhibition “Glasstress” at the Venice Biennale this year, a further step in her desire to transform concrete matter into something floating and fragile.The next stage will be to stretch the sculptures so that they eventually tear, but she and Horne, who helps with architectural quandaries, still have to find a way to make that work.The themes of the duality of existence and its ephemeral nature have found a powerful expression in Houshiary’s animations. Passing downstairs to the studio basement, she dims the lights and plays her piece Breath, a variation on her Battery Park installation, which is owned by both the Museum of Modern Art and the Guggenheim. Four vocalists simultaneously chant Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, and Islamic prayers while their breath is visualized on four video screens. Encapsulating the essence of being in the idea of exhalation and inhalation, the faint imprint expands and contracts on the screens like breath on glass with the ebb and flow of the voices.Houshiary points out the harmonious flow between the different cadences, almost like an audio version of what peaceful coexistence among races and religions could be. “I think it’s a very important work for me; it really says a lot about who we are,” she says as the chants fill the surrounding darkness.Houshiary has made several variations of the work, one of which was for her Battery Park installation, commissioned by the nonprofit Creative Time. Another is being shown at the Venice Biennale in a 22-foot-high tower, aimed at immersing the viewer in the multisensory experience.

Breath II, Houshiary and Horne’s installation in Battery Park, New York, 2004.

CHARLie.SAMUELS.COM/COURTESY LEHMANN MAUPIN, NEW YORK AND HONG KONG

David Toop, a musician, sound curator, and author of several books on the history of sound, draws parallels between Houshiary’s “desire to capture what is not tangible, what is invisible” and the music of John Cage, in which silence, or lack of music, is as important as the notes.

“There’s a kind of field there of almost nothingness seething with life,” Toop says. “That’s what I feel about silence. It’s not a blankness; there’s a different level of perception, so it demands a certain kind of attunement to fully engage with it.”Back in her upper loft, where music vibrates through the space eclipsing the drone of airplanes from nearby Heathrow, the only sign of time passing is the changing light on Houshiary’s canvases.“I love this light in England; it’s very bleary and hazy. There’s no edge to things,” she says. “I don”t like a harsh, definable light like they have where I come from.” Unsurprisingly for an artist who is unconfined by boundaries, she finds Turner and Monet liberating in the way they make objects dissolve into the atmosphere.“Its somewhere between seeing and not seeing. The perception is free to move between the two rather than to be fixed,” she says. “Perhaps that’s why I like this veiled light.”Elizabeth Fullerton is a London-based freelance writer and a former foreign correspondent for Reuters.

Shirazeh Houshiary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

 

The new East window of St Martin’s in the Fields church by Shirazeh Houshiary

Shirazeh Houshiary (born Shiraz 15 January 1955) is an Iranian installation artist and sculptor. She is a former Turner Prize nominee, and lives and works in London.

Life and work[edit]

Shirazeh Houshiary left her native country of Iran in 1973. She attended Chelsea School of Art, London (1976–9) and was a Cardiff College of Art junior fellow at (1979–80).

Houshiary was identified with other young sculptors of her generation such as Richard Deacon and Anish Kapoor, but her work was distinct from theirs in the strong Persian influence which it displayed, though sharing with Kapoor a spiritual concern. Her ideology draws on Sufi mystical doctrine and Jalal ad-Din Muhammad Rumi, a Persian mystic and poet from the 13th century.[1]

She was a nominee for the 1994 Turner Prize. In 2008, the St Martin-in-the-Fields Church in London unveiled a commission by Shirazeh Houshiary and Pip Horne for the East Window.[2]Houshiary’s work is included in numerous public and private collections including the Museum of Modern Art, New York and The Tate Collection, London. In 2005, Creative Timecommissioned Houshiary and Pip Horne for their Creative Time Art on the Plaza series where the monumental Breath tower was exhibited in New York City. Her work was also included in Feri Daftari’s exhibition Without Boundary: Seventeen Ways of Looking at the Museum of Modern Art in 2006 and the 17th Biennale of Sydney in 2010.[3]

In 2005 (Veil)[4] and 2008 (Shroud),[5] Houshiary worked with animator Mark Hatchard of Hotbox Studios to create animations for gallery installations at the Lehmann Maupin Gallery in New York and the Lisson Gallery in London.[6]

Notes and references[edit]

  1. Jump up^ “Biography” tate.org.uk. Accessed September 13, 2006
  2. Jump up^ Glancey, Jonathan, The Guardian, 25 April 2008
  3. Jump up^ “Shirazeh Houshiary” 17th Biennale of Sydney. 2010.
  4. Jump up^ “Veil preview” Oneartworld.com. Accessed 2010
  5. Jump up^ “Shroud Preview” ArtFacts.net. Accessed 2010
  6. Jump up^ “Shirazeh Houshiary interview”. Aesthetica. 2008

External links[edit]

[hide]

New British Sculpture

Artists
Galleries
Authority control

Categories:

_________________________

Shirazeh Houshiary, b.1955

East Window in St Martin in the Fields 2007,

Caro’s religious work is not purely abstract. At the least it hints at the representational, as have nearly all the artists we have considered in previous lectures. This is for fundamental reasons because Christianity is committed to the fact that the Divine Word became flesh, the invisible was made manifest. But even more abstract art can work in some contexts, as we saw in the case of the Ceri Richards with his Sacrament Chapel in Liverpool’s Roman Catholic Cathedral. Amongst contemporary work in this genre I single out Shirazeh Houshiary, who born in Shiraz, but has lived and worked in UK since 1976. She trained at the ChelseaCollege of Art and has work in many major collections round the world. Her work draws on Sufi spirituality, particularly Persian mysticism.

 

Artist Bio

Download CV

Shirazeh Houshiary

Shirazeh Houshiary (b. 1955, Iran) moved to London in the early 1970’s and graduated from the Chelsea School of Art in 1979, emerging with a group of artists that included Anish Kapoor and Richard Deacon. Houshiary is well known for her sculptures in which she investigates spiritual principles and abstract forms. In her first solo exhibition in New York, presented at Lehmann Maupin Gallery in 1999, she exhibited a series of paintings that explored her interest in Sufism and the 13th Century mystic poet Jalal al-Din Rumi. The calligraphy was implemented in graphite and repeatedly laced into the luminous surfaces.  In her labor-intensive paintings she unites the word and the canvas into a meditative visual experience, which results in work that is about presence and experience.
Houshiary, who was a Turner Prize nominee in 1994, has had solo and group exhibitions at the Camden Arts Centre, London (1993); SITE Santa Fe, New Mexico (2002); Tate Liverpool (2003); the Museum of Modern Art, New York (2007); RISD Museum, Providence (2011); and the Royal Academy of Arts, London (2012), among others. The artist was included in the 17th Biennale of Sydney in 2010 and the 2012 Kiev Biennale, Ukraine.
Houshiary’s work is in prestigious public collections including the British Council Collection, London; The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Museum of Contemporary Art, Prato; Museum of Modern Art, New York; Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York; and Tate Modern, London, among others. The artist currently lives and works in London, England. 

[1] Pamela Tudor Craig (Lady Wedgewood) Icons of the Invisible God; Selected sculptures of Peter Eugene Ball, Chevron, 1999, p.8

[2] A very positive response to the work was given in an article by Tom Devonshire Jones in the “Church Times, 14, October, 2008

____________

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 63 THE BEATLES (Part O , BECAUSE THE BEATLES LOVED HUMOR IT IS FITTING THAT 6 COMEDIANS MADE IT ON THE COVER OF “SGT. PEPPER’S”!) (Feature on artist H.C. Westermann )

__________________ A Funny Press Interview of The Beatles in The US (1964) Funny Pictures of The Beatles Published on Oct 23, 2012 funny moments i took from the beatles movie; A Hard Days Night ___________________ Scene from Help! The Beatles Funny Clips and Outtakes (Part 1) The Beatles * Wildcat* (funny) Uploaded on Mar 20, […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 62 THE BEATLES (Part N The last 4 people alive from cover of Stg. Pepper’s and the reason Bob Dylan was put on the cover!) (Feature on artist Larry Bell)

_____________________ Great article on Dylan and Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Cover: A famous album by the fab four – The Beatles – is “Sergeant peppers lonely hearts club band“. The album itself is one of the must influential albums of all time. New recording techniques and experiments with different styles of music made this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 61 THE BEATLES (Part M, Why was Karl Marx on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist George Petty)

__________________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview 69 THE BEATLES TWO OF US As a university student, Karl Marx (1818-1883) joined a movement known as the Young Hegelians, who strongly criticized the political and cultural establishments of the day. He became a journalist, and the radical nature of his writings would eventually get him expelled by the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 60 THE BEATLES (Part L, Why was Aleister Crowley on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Jann Haworth )

____________ Aleister Crowley on cover of Stg. Pepper’s: _______________ I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 59 THE BEATLES (Part K, Advocating drugs was reason Aldous Huxley was on cover of Stg. Pepper’s) (Feature on artist Aubrey Beardsley)

(HD) Paul McCartney & Ringo Starr – With a Little Help From My Friends (Live) John Lennon The Final Interview BBC Radio 1 December 6th 1980 A young Aldous Huxley pictured below: _______   Much attention in this post is given to the songs LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS and TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS which […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 58 THE BEATLES (Part J, Why was Carl Gustav Jung on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Richard Merkin)

___

_______________

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS!! Part 126 Christian de Duve, Nobel Prize-winning Belgian cytologist and biochemist, “There is a complete disassociation between the dogma and belief and the way we scientists approach the search for truth.” (Post includes portion of my 5-15-94 letter to him)

_______

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif AhmedHaroon Ahmed,  Jim Al-Khalili, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BateSir Patrick BatesonSimon Blackburn, Colin Blakemore, Ned BlockPascal BoyerPatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky, Brian CoxPartha Dasgupta,  Alan Dershowitz, Frank DrakeHubert Dreyfus, John DunnBart Ehrman, Mark ElvinRichard Ernst, Stephan Feuchtwang, Robert FoleyDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan GreenfieldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan HaidtTheodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Stephen HawkingHermann Hauser, Robert HindeRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodGerard ‘t HooftCaroline HumphreyNicholas Humphrey,  Herbert Huppert,  Gareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart KauffmanMasatoshi Koshiba,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George Lakoff,  Rodolfo LlinasElizabeth Loftus,  Alan MacfarlaneDan McKenzie,  Mahzarin BanajiPeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  P.Z.Myers,   Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff, David Parkin,  Jonathan Parry, Roger Penrose,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceVS RamachandranLisa RandallLord Martin ReesColin RenfrewAlison Richard,  C.J. van Rijsbergen,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerJohn SulstonBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisMax TegmarkNeil deGrasse Tyson,  Martinus J. G. Veltman, Craig Venter.Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John Walker, James D. WatsonFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

Origin, Evolution, and the Future of Life on Earth

___

Ultimate Reality of Christian de Duve

______

The Origin, Evolution & Future of Life (H1150) – Full Video

____

Christian de Duve

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian de Duve
Christian de Duve.tif

de Duve lecturing on the origin of the eukaryotic cell in October 2012
Born Christian René Marie Joseph de Duve
2 October 1917
Thames Ditton, Surrey, Great Britain
Died 4 May 2013 (aged 95)
Grez-Doiceau, Belgium
Residence Belgium
Citizenship Belgian
Nationality Belgium
Fields
Institutions
Alma mater
  • Onze-Lieve-Vrouwecollege
  • Catholic University of Leuven
Known for Cell organelles
Notable awards
Spouse Janine Herman (m. 1943; d. 2008)
Children
  • Two sons, two daughters:
  • Thierry de Duve
  • Alain de Duve
  • Anne de Duve
  • Françoise de Duve

Dutch Queen Beatrix meets 5 Nobel Prize winners: Paul Berg, Christian de Duve, Steven Weinberg, Manfred Eigen, Nicolaas Bloembergen (1983)

Christian René Marie Joseph, Viscount de Duve (2 October 1917 – 4 May 2013) was a Nobel Prize-winning Belgian cytologist and biochemist.[2][3] He made serendipitous discoveries of two cell organelles, peroxisome and lysosome, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1974 with Albert Claude and George E. Palade (“for their discoveries concerning the structural and functional organization of the cell”).[4] In addition to peroxisome and lysosome, he invented the scientific names such as autophagy, endocytosis, and exocytosis in a single occasion.[5][6][7][8][9]

A son of Belgian refugees during the First World War, de Duve was born in Thames Ditton, Surrey, Great Britain.[10] His family returned to Belgium in 1920. He was educated by the Jesuits at Onze-Lieve-Vrouwinstituut in Antwerp, and studied medicine at the Catholic University of Leuven. Upon earning his MD in 1941, he joined research in chemistry, working on insulin and its role in diabetes mellitus. His thesis earned him the highest university degree agrégation de l’enseignement supérieur (equivalent to PhD) in 1945. With his work on the purification of penicillin, he obtained an MSc degree in 1946. He went for further training under (later Nobel Prize winners) Hugo Theorell at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, and Carl and Gerti Cori at the Washington University in St. Louis. He joined the faculty of medicine at Leuven in 1947. In 1960 he was invited to the Rockfeller Institute (now Rockefeller University). With mutual arrangement with Leuven, he became professor in both universities from 1962, dividing his time between Leuven and New York. He became emeritus professor of Leuven university in 1985, and of Rockefeller in 1988.

De Duve was decorated with Viscount in 1989 by King Baudouin of Belgium. He was also a recipient of Francqui Prize, Gairdner Foundation International Award, Heineken Prize, and E. B. Wilson Medal. In 1974 he founded the International Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology in Brussels, eventually renamed the de Duve Institute in 2005. He was the founding President of the L’Oréal-UNESCO Awards for Women in Science.[11]

He died on 4 May (Saturday) 2013 by self-induced euthanasia in the presence of all of his children.[12]

Early life and education[edit]

De Duve was born of a shopkeeper Alphonse de Duve and wife Madeleine Pungs in the village of Thames Ditton, near London. His parents fled Belgium at the outbreak of the First World War. After the war in 1920, at age three, he and his family returned to Belgium. He was a precocious boy, always the best student (primus perpetuus as he recalled) in school, except for one year when he was pronounced “out of competition” to give chance to other students.[2] He was educated by the Jesuits at Onze-Lieve-Vrouwinstituut in Antwerp, before studying at the Catholic University of Leuven in 1934.[13] He wanted to specialize in endocrinology and joined the laboratory of the Belgian physiologist Joseph P. Bouckaert. During his last year at medical school in 1940, the Germans invaded Belgium. He was drafted to the Belgian army, and posted in southern France as medical officer. There, he was almost immediately taken as prisoner of war by Germans. But fortunate of his ability to speak fluent German and Flemish, he outwitted his captors and escaped back to Belgium. (The adventure he later described as “more comical than heroic”.)[14] He immediately continued his medical course, and obtained his MD in 1941 from Leuven. His primary research was on insulin and its role in glucose metabolism. He made an initial discovery that a commercial preparation of insulin was contaminated with another pancreatic hormone, the insulin antagonist glucagon. However, laboratory supplies at Leuven were in shortage, he therefore enrolled in a programme to earn a degree in chemistry at the Cancer Institute. His research on insulin was summed up in a 400-page book titled Glucose, Insuline et Diabète (Glucose, Insulin and Diabetes) published in 1945, simultaneously in Brussels and Paris. The book was condensed into a technical dissertation which earned him the most advanced degree at the university level agrégation de l’enseignement supérieur (an equivalent of a doctorate – he called it “a sort of glorified Ph.D.”) in 1945.[14] His thesis was followed by a number of scientific publications.[15] He subsequently obtained MSc in chemistry in 1946, for which he worked on the purification of penicillin.[16][17] To enhance his skill in biochemistry, he trained in the laboratory of Hugo Theorell (who later won The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1955) at the Nobel Medical Institute in Stockholm for 18 months during 1946-1947. In 1947 he received a financial assistance as Rockefeller Foundation fellow and worked for six months with Carl and Gerti Cori‘s at Washington University in St. Louis (the husband and wife were joint winners of The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1947).[18]

Career and research[edit]

In March 1947 de Duve joined the faculty of the medical school of the Catholic University of Leuven teaching physiological chemistry. In 1951 he became full professor. In 1960 Detlev Bronk, the then president of the Rockfeller Institute (what is now Rockefeller University) of New York City, met him at Brussels and offered him professorship and a laboratory. The rector of Leuven, afraid of entirely losing de Duve, made a compromise over dinner that de Duve would still be under part-time appointment with a relief from teaching and conducting examinations. The rector and Bronk made an agreement which would intilally last for five years. The official implementation was in 1962, and de Duve simultaneously headed the research laboratories at Leuven and at Rockefeller University, dividing his time between New York and Leuven.[19] In 1969 the Leuven university was split into two separate universities. He joined the French-speaking side of Université catholique de Louvain. He took emeritus status at Université catholique de Louvain in 1985 and at Rockefeller in 1988, though he continued to conduct research. Among other subjects, he studied the distribution of enzymes in rat liver cells using rate-zonal centrifugation. His work on cell fractionation provided an insight into the function of cell structures. He specialized in subcellular biochemistry and cell biology and discovered new cell organelles.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]

Personal life[edit]

De Duve was brought up as a Roman Catholic. In his later years he tended towards agnosticism, if not strict atheism.[67][68] However, de Duve also thought that “Most biologists, today, tend to see life and mind as cosmic imperatives, written into the very fabric of the universe, rather than as extraordinarily improbable products of chance.[69] “It would be an exaggeration to say I’m not afraid of death,” he explicitly said to a Belgian newspaper Le Soir just a month before his death, “but I’m not afraid of what comes after, because I’m not a believer.”[70][71] He strongly supported biological evolution as a fact, and dismissive of creation science and intelligent design, as explicitly stated in his last book, Genetics of Original Sin: The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity. He was among the seventy-eight Nobel laureates in science to endorse the effort to repeal Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.[72]

De Duve married Janine Herman on 30 September 1943. Together they had had two sons, Thierry and Alain, and two daughters, Anne and Françoise. Janine died in 2008, aged 86.[16]

Death[edit]

De Duve died on 4 May 2013, at his home in Nethen, Belgium, at the age of 95. He decided to end his life by legal euthanasia, performed by two doctors before his four children. He had been long suffering from cancer and atrial fibrillation, and his health problems were exacerbated by a recent fall in his home. He is survived by two sons and two daughters; two brothers, Pierre and Daniel; seven grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren.[73][74][75]

De Duve was cremated as he had willed, and his ashes were distributed among family members and friends.[3]

Awards and honours[edit]

De Duve won the Francqui Prize for Biological and Medical Sciences in 1960, and the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1974. King Baudouin of Belgium honoured him to Viscount in 1989.[16] He was the recipient of the Canada Gairdner International Award in 1967, and the Dr H.P. Heineken Prize for Biochemistry and Biophysics in 1973 from the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. He was elected a foreign associate of the US National Academy of Sciences in 1975. He won the Harden Medal of the Biochemical Society of Great Britain in 1978; the Theobald Smith Award from the Albany Medical College in 1981; the Jimenez Diaz Award in 1985; the Innovators of Biochemistry Award from Medical College of Virginia in 1986; and the E. B. Wilson Medal from the American Society for Cell Biology in 1989.[76] He was also a member of the Royal Academies of Medicine and the Royal Academy of Sciences, Arts, and of Literature of Belgium; the Pontifical Academy of Sciences of the Vatican; the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; the French National Academy of Medicine; the Academy of Sciences of Paris; the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina; the American Philosophical Society. He was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS) in 1988.[1] In addition, he received honorary doctorates from eighteen universities around the world.[18]

Legacy[edit]

De Duve founded a multidisciplinary biomedical research institute at Université catholique de Louvain in 1974, called the International Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology (ICP), and later renamed “de Duve Institute.”[77] He remained its president until 1991. On his 80th birthday in 1997 it was renamed the Christian de Duve Institute of Cellular Pathology. In 2005 it was further contracted to simply the de Duve Institute.[78]

De Duve was one of the founding members of the Belgian Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, established on 15 September 1951.[79]

De Duve is remembered as an inventor of important scientific terminology. He coined the word lysosome in 1955, peroxisome in 1966, and autophagy, endocytosis, and exocytosis in one instance at the Ciba Foundation Symposium on Lysosomes held in London during 12–14 February 1963, while he, “was in a word-coining mood.”[21][80]

De Duve’s life, including his work resulting in a Nobel Prize, and his passion for biology is the subject of a documentary film Portrait of a Nobel Prize: Christian de Duve (Portrait de Nobel : Christian de Duve), directed by Aurélie Wijnants. It was first aired on Eurochannel in 2012.[81]

__

In  the third video below in the 144th clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

____

Quote from Christian de Duve in the film series “A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)” and my response below ( Original interview was in 2005 and was conducted by Harry Kroto at the annual Lindau meeting):

Of course, I fully agree with you and I think with most of my fellow scientists. There is a complete disassociation between the dogma and belief and the way we scientists approach the search for truth.   And so obviously as a scientist and being brought up as a Catholic I could not safely continue accepting the teaching of the church. 

Let me make two observations here.

FIRST, I think a person needs to take time examine the historical accuracy of the Bible. If the Bible is true then history and historical records should have something to say about that.

Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject and if you like you could just google these subjects: 1. The Babylonian Chronicleof Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism)4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites6.Shishak Smiting His Captives7. Moabite Stone8Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets10. Cyrus Cylinder11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E.12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription13. The Pilate Inscription14. Caiaphas Ossuary14 B Pontius Pilate Part 214c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.,

SECOND, if there is no lasting meaning to life then CHANCE RULES. Let me discuss that a little more below.

Christian de Duve was very critical of Creationism!!!

Chrisian de Duve was a very sharp critic of creationism even though he grew up in a family that who were committed Catholics. In the Wikipedia article cited above we read these words:

“Most biologists, today, tend to see life and mind as cosmic imperatives, written into the very fabric of the universe, rather than as extraordinarily improbable products of chance.[69] “It would be an exaggeration to say I’m not afraid of death,” he explicitly said to a Belgian newspaper Le Soir just a month before his death, “but I’m not afraid of what comes after, because I’m not a believer.”[70][71] He strongly supported biological evolution as a fact, and dismissive of creation science and intelligent design, as explicitly stated in his last book, Genetics of Original Sin: The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity. He was among the seventy-eight Nobel laureates in science to endorse the effort to repeal Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.[72]

I do want to salute him for at least taking a careful look and seeing that there were clearly two different paths we can take philosophically. We can either realize that the answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and the Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. Or we have to say that it is all by CHANCE. Below are the words of Christian de Duve: 

“The answer of modern molecular biology to this much-debated question is categorical: chance, and chance alone, did it all, from primeval soup to man, with only natural selection to sift its effects. This affirmation now rests on overwhelming factual evidence.”

A Guided Tour Of The Living Cell, Volume Two, Page 357
Scientific American Library, 1984

Portion of my 5-15-94 letter to Christian de Duve

On May 15, 1994 on the 10th anniversary of the passing of Francis Schaeffer I attempted to send a letter to almost every living Nobel Prize winner and I believe  Dr.Christian de Duve  was probably among that group and here is a portion of that letter below:

I have enclosed a cassette tape by Adrian Rogers and it includes  a story about  Charles Darwin‘s journey from  the position of theistic evolution to agnosticism. Here are the four bridges that Adrian Rogers says evolutionists can’t cross in the CD  “Four Bridges that the Evolutionist Cannot Cross.” 1. The Origin of Life and the law of biogenesis. 2. The Fixity of the Species. 3.The Second Law of Thermodynamics. 4. The Non-Physical Properties Found in Creation.  

 

Adrian Rogers is pictured below and Francis Schaeffer above.

 

In the first 3 minutes of the cassette tape is the hit song “Dust in the Wind.” Below I have given you some key points  Francis Schaeffer makes about the experiment that Solomon undertakes in the book of Ecclesiastes to find satisfaction by  looking into  learning (1:16-18), laughter, ladies, luxuries,  and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20).

Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.”

Here the first 7 verses of Ecclesiastes followed by Schaeffer’s commentary on it:

The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun? A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever. The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises. The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.  

Solomon is showing a high degree of comprehension of evaporation and the results of it.  Seeing also in reality nothing changes. There is change but always in a set framework and that is cycle. You can relate this to the concepts of modern man. Ecclesiastes is the only pessimistic book in the Bible and that is because of the place where Solomon limits himself. He limits himself to the question of human life, life under the sun between birth and death and the answers this would give.

Solomon doesn’t place man outside of the cycle. Man doesn’t escape the cycle. Man is in the cycle. Birth and death and youth and old age.

There is no doubt in my mind that Solomon had the same experience in his life that I had as a younger man (at the age of 18 in 1930). I remember standing by the sea and the moon arose and it was copper and beauty. Then the moon did not look like a flat dish but a globe or a sphere since it was close to the horizon. One could feel the global shape of the earth too. Then it occurred to me that I could contemplate the interplay of the spheres and I was exalted because I thought I can look upon them with all their power, might, and size, but they could contempt nothing. Then came upon me a horror of great darkness because it suddenly occurred to me that although I could contemplate them and they could contemplate nothing yet they would continue to turn in ongoing cycles when I saw no more forever and I was crushed.

Watching the film HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? in 1979 impacted my life greatly

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

 

_______

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Schaeffer noted that Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

  1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
  2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13 “I have seen something else under the sun:  The race is not to the swift
    or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant  or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.  Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times  that fall unexpectedly upon them.”)
  3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1; “Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—
    and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—  and they have no comforter.” 7:15 “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness,  and the wicked living long in their wickedness. ).
  4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).
  5. There is no ultimate lasting meaning in life. (1:2)

By the way, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes finishes with Solomon emphasizing that serving God is the only proper response of man. Solomon looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture in the final chapter of the book in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, “ Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.  For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. In 1978 I heard the song “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas when it rose to #6 on the charts. That song told me that Kerry Livgren the writer of that song and a member of Kansas had come to the same conclusion that Solomon had and that “all was meaningless UNDER THE SUN,” and looking ABOVE THE SUN was the only option.  I remember mentioning to my friends at church that we may soon see some members of Kansas become Christians because their search for the meaning of life had obviously come up empty even though they had risen from being an unknown band to the top of the music business and had all the wealth and fame that came with that.

Livgren wrote, “All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Both Kerry Livgren and Dave Hope of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and Dave Hope had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981.  Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible Church. Hope is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

______________   George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

  The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

__________________   Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute  episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 45 Woody Allen “Reason is Dead” (Feature on artists Allora & Calzadilla )

Love and Death [Woody Allen] – What if there is no God? [PL] ___________ _______________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 44 The Book of Genesis (Featured artist is Trey McCarley )

___________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: ____________________________ Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?) Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro) Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1) Dr. Francis Schaeffer […]

__

 

 

_____

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 159 BEATLES, Soccer player Albert Stubbins made it on SGT. PEP’S because he was sport hero (Artist featured is Richard Land)

SGT. PEP’S was put together to look at what the lonely people hung their hopes on and athletes were one of those hopes. As little kids in Liverpool the Beatles all were  soccer fans and the League Championship returned to Liverpool after a 24 year absence in 1947 with the leadership of the player Albert Stubbins.  Some say that John Lennon picked him because of his unusual name.

In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world.”

Francis Schaeffer – How Should We then Live – 07.The Age of Non Reason

 

__

Now You Can Name the Athletes On the Cover Of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band

oxforddnb.comoxforddnb.com

BY BRYAN ARMEN GRAHAM  Posted: Fri May. 31, 2013

You can try to deny it in some sort of misguided pursuit of individuality. You can point to a lot of other groups that are just as important. But I defy you to press play on Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, which hit shelves 46 years ago this weekend, and then argue that anyone has ever done it better.

Perhaps even more famous than the music itself is the record’s iconic, Grammy Award-winning cover. The legend is that each band member chose roughly 10 people they wanted (or would have wanted) to perform for. The roster includes writers, artists, film stars, musicians, Indian gurus — and these three athletes. (Save it in your back pocket for the next time you want to win a bar bet.)


Sonny Liston

Where he appears: Front row all the way to the left next to the wax model of George Harrison.

Sporting résumé: Knocked out Floyd Patterson in one round for the heavyweight title in 1962 (at a time when it really meant something); twice stopped by Muhammad Ali; only undisputed heavyweight champion to quit on his stool.

Cultural cache: Enigmatic, tortured figure; died under mysterious circumstances less than five years after Sgt. Pepper’s was released.

Beatles connection: Ali’s 1964 meeting with the Fab Four while training for the first Liston fight is considerably more famous, but the Big Bear actually went to a Beatles concert that same year, though he was kind of a hater. “Is them bums what all this fuss is about?” he was quoted as saying. “Sheet, man, mah dawg play better drums than that kid with the big nose.”

Cover story: Word is that John Lennon was a big fan.


Albert Stubbins

Where he appears: Second row northeast of Harrison and to the left of Marlene Dietrich.

Sporting résumé: Powerfully built English footballer who signed with Liverpool in 1946 for £12,500, then a club record; scored 28 goals in first season with Reds to lead team to first league title in 24 years; retired in 1953 with 83 goals in 178 appearances.

Cultural cache: Moved into sportswriting after retirement from playing career; appeared as a minor character in Stephen Baxter’s 1995 novel The Time Ships.

Beatles connection: While it’s true Stubbins was banging them in for the Fab Four’s hometown side during their formative years, the truth — according to Hunter Davies’ authorized biography — is none of the Beatles were massive soccer fans. (Though, McCartney was born into an Everton family.)

Cover story: The striker was one of Lennon’s choices, as his name had apparently amused him as a child. Stubbins had no idea he was on the cover until the record arrived on his doorstep shortly after its release, signed by all four with McCartney’s handwritten note: Well done, Albert, for all those glorious years of football. Long may you bob and weave.


Johnny Weissmuller

Where he appears: Second row center behind Ringo.

Sporting résumé: Won five Olympic gold medals for swimming and one bronze for water polo during the 1920s; set 67 world records; reportedly undefeated in official competition for the entirety of his competitive career.

Cultural cache: Played Tarzan in 12 motion pictures from 1932 through ’48.

Beatles connection: None, apparently.

Cover story: McCartney said he was chosen because they liked the sound of his name, replacing an image of Adolf Hitler (Lennon’s pick) present in early photographs of the montage.

_______________

Liverpool Legend – Albert Stubbins

Uploaded on May 13, 2011

Liverpool Legend – Albert Stubbins

Willie Fagan, Albert Stubbins and Billy with their medals presented to them prior to a game against Stoke at Anfield on 3 January 1948 by William C. Cuff,

Albert Stubbins

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Albert Stubbins
Personal information
Date of birth 17 July 1919
Place of birth Wallsend, England
Date of death 28 December 2002 (aged 83)
Playing position Centre forward
Youth career
Whitley & Monkseaton
Sunderland
Senior career*
Years Team Apps (Gls)
1937–1946 Newcastle United 27 (5)
1946–1953 Liverpool 159 (75)
1953–1954 Ashington
* Senior club appearances and goals counted for the domestic league only.

† Appearances (goals)

Albert Stubbins (13 July 1919 – 28 December 2002) was an English footballer. He played in the position of centre forward, although his career was limited by the onset of World War II. He gained most of his fame and success playing for Liverpool where he won the League Championship in 1947. His later claim to fame was an appearance on the front cover of The BeatlesSgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band album.

Dr Toon Albert Stubbins

Life and playing career[edit]

Born in Wallsend, Tyne and Wear, England, he spent his early years in the United States, returning to Wallsend, where he attended Carville School, in 1929. Stubbins first played for Newcastle United in 1937, appearing in official games 30 times and scoring six goals for the team. In wartime games (classified as friendlies) he scored 188 goals in just 231 appearances.

In 1946 he was signed by Liverpool for a then club record of £12,500. Stubbins had also been approached by Liverpool’s closest rivals, Everton, and he settled the decision with a toss of the coin. The coin should have been framed by manager George Kay as he made an immediate impact at the club, making his debut on 14 September 1946 in a league match at Burnden Park he scored an 82nd-minute goal as the Reds left it late to claim all the spoils in a 3–1 victory over Bolton Wanderers.

His move to Liverpool gained him most of his fame and success; Stubbins scored 28 goals (24 league goals) in the 1946–7 season (making him joint top scorer with Jack Balmer) helping Liverpool to win the League Championship, the first time in 24 years.

Stubbins also scored 24 goals the following season. Although a contractual dispute in the 1948–9 season limited his appearances for the Merseyside club, he then helped Liverpool reach the 1950 FA Cup Final, the first time Liverpool had ever appeared at Wembley. However, they lost to Arsenal by two goals to nil.

On 18 October 1950, at Blackpool‘s Bloomfield Road, Stubbins netted five goals in the Football League‘s 6–3 victory over the Irish League in an exhibition match.[1]

Injuries forced him to retire in 1953, having scored 83 goals in 178 appearances, or 1 every 2.1 games. For a player with such an impressive goal ratio, it is astonishing that he was constantly overlooked by Walter Winterbottom, the England manager at the time. He played for the England once in an unofficial ‘victory’ international against Wales in 1945, a game England lost 1–0.

Following his retirement, Stubbins entered a full-time career in sports journalism, although he briefly coached an American semi-professional side, the New York Americans in 1960.

Stubbins’ later claim to fame was an appearance on the front cover of The BeatlesSgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band album, the only footballer to be given that honour. He also has a Liverpool FC fan club named in his honour. He also featured as a minor character in Stephen Baxter’s time-travelling novel The Time Ships. He died in 2002, aged 82, after a short illness.

Career details[edit]

  • Wartime guest games (1939–1946) – 231 appearances, 188 goals
  • Liverpool FC (1946–1953) – 178 appearances, 83 goals, Football League First Division (Level 1) championship winners medal (1947), F.A Cup runners-up medal (1950)

Statistics[edit]

Club performance
Club Season League FA Cup League Cup Europe Others Total
App Goals App Goals App Goals App Goals App Goals App Goals
Liverpool 1952–53 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0
1951–52 12 5 0 0 0 0 12 5
1950–51 23 6 1 0 0 0 24 6
1949–50 28 10 7 1 0 0 35 11
1948–49 15 6 3 1 0 0 18 7
1947–48 40 24 2 2 0 0 42 26
1946–47 36 24 6 4 0 0 42 28
Total 159 75 19 8 0 0 178 83

References[edit]

  1. Jump up^ Gillatt, Peter (30 November 2009). Blackpool FC On This Day: History, Facts and Figures from Every Day of the Year. Pitch Publishing Ltd. ISBN 1-905411-50-2.

External links[edit]

Tribute to Liverpool FC (1892-1959)

Did the Beatles like football?

Also in this week’s Knowledge: Steve Archibald on Top of the Pops and football references in Spinal Tap (reprise). Send your questions and answers toknowledge@guardianunlimited.co.uk
The Beatles

The Beatles: big football fans?

Did any of the Beatles ever express an interest in football, in particular whether they favoured Liverpool or Everton,” asks Steven Draper, “or did they steer clear of the subject for fear of alienating potential fans?”

The answer, James, is ambiguous at best. The Beatles were never regulars at either Anfield or Goodison Park – so it really depends on which titbit of folklore you choose to swallow.

Donald Philips is among many who think that the Sergeant Pepper cover is the killer giveaway. Standing just on Marlene Dietrich’s shoulder grinning madly is Albert Stubbins, the red-haired Liverpool centre forward – and the only player to make the many-faced cover.

While there are those who claim, rather mean-spiritedly, that Stubbins only made the cover because John Lennon liked his name, many more are determined to prove that the Beatles worshiped at the Kop when not hopping across the continents for a visit to the Maharishi.

Karl Coppack comes up with Paul McCartney trying to get the 1977 Liverpool v Man United FA Cup final on the radio while on his boat in the Caribbean, while the words clutching at straws come to mind for both Stephen Pepper – who recalls the Beatles wearing a huge red-and-white scarf in a skiing scene of Help! – and Ian Gresham, who remembers snaps from 1968’s Mad Day Out photo session of McCartney wearing a red-and-white rosette.

A number of you with a worrying knowledge of Beatles lyrics also point out that Matt Busby – an ex-Liverpool player – gets a namecheck on Dig It.

But there are equally tenuous claims for a link between McCartney and Everton. Paul has been known to mention that his uncles used to support the Toffees – and that every now and then he would tarry along with them.

Advertisement

And then there was the rumour that warmed Everton hearts a couple of years back that McCartney was about to invest a lot of money with the club. They’re still waiting for that investment.

The real answer seems to be that the Beatles did not have any great love of football – unusual in four lads from a footballing city, as Karl Naden points out, but not impossible. Indeed, the only positive sighting of a Beatle at a sporting event comes from Iain Saunders, who sat behind McCartney at a New York Yankees baseball game.

Finally George Harrision’s reply to those impertinent enough to ask which club he supported was the obtuse: “There are three teams in Liverpool and I prefer the other one.” Which leaves us very much where we started.

STEVE ARCHIBALD: THE FIRST MAN TO APPEAR TWICE ON TOP OF THE POPS?

“Was Steve Archibald the first man to appear on Top Of The Pops twice in the same night with two different groups (Spurs and Scotland) in 1982?” asks someone whose name we have misplaced.

No he wasn’t, Mr/Ms Anonymous. With eagle-eyed chart knowledge, Knowledge reader Brian Spurrell flamboyantly trumps Steve Archibald with, wait for it, session singer Tony Burrows.

Burrows, Spurrell remembers, once appeared on TOTP three times with three separate bands. “That was in early 1970 when his session career was at its peak and records by the Brotherhood of Man – United We Stand, White Plains – My Baby Loves Loving, Edison Lighthouse – Love Grows Where My Rosemary Goes, and The Pipkins – Gimme Dat Ding, were all in the charts together. All of them feature him on vocals.”

But it was downhill all the way after that. After the triple-starring show, Burrows was collared by a member of the production staff and told he’d been unofficially blacklisted from the show – apparently it was starting to look like a bit of a fix – and Burrows did not appear on TV for another four years despite singing on countless hits.

Nor were his own records played on the radio until First Class recorded Beach Baby in 1974 – a record which reached No4 in the UK charts.

Steve Archibald went on to play for Barcelona.

FOOTBALL IN SPINAL TAP: REPRISE

“In the legendary rockumentary, This Is Spinal Tap, bass player Derek Smalls wears an early 80s Umbro football shirt in several scenes, including the famous airport security scene. Who did he support? It looks a bit like Bradford City to me, but I thought he was from the West Midlands,” expounds Mark Meadowcroft while adjusting his spandex strides, strapping on his axe and turning his amp up to 11.

We’ve dealt with this enquiry before Mark, back in the day when money didn’t matter and it was just about the music. The garment you speak of was in fact a Shrewsbury Town replica shirt.

“Speaking of Derek Smalls in his Shrewsbury shirt, only a true Tap obsessive will have spotted David St Hubbins’s favourite team: Wolverhampton Wanderers,” says Stephen Buckland, going one louder. “As the band arrive in New York for their very first gig, the guitarist and vocalist can be seen sporting the familiar gold and black scarf behind manager Ian Faith. It’s only a few frames, but it’s there. Buy the video, folks.”

Meanwhile Andy Barnes says that “while watching Spinal Tap again, I noticed Derek Smalls sporting a claret and blue baseball cap a lot through the first half of the film. The writing is difficult to make out, but as they go barbers shop at the grave of The King, you can just make out the words West Ham across the front. A pretty good reference to their supposed east-end roots, but a bit odd considering he’s got his Shrewsbury Town shirt on at the same time.”

For even more football-related Tap references and a whole host of other useless but compelling information, why not visit The Knowledge ArchiveThe Knowledge archive.

CAN YOU HELP?

“In the recent Madrid derby Athletico were captained by 19-year-old Fernando Torres. It lead to a discussion about other players who’d taken the armband so young with Tony Adams being widely suggest as the youngest top flight captain in recent history,” says Crispin O’Brien. “Is this true? Also who’s the youngest player to have been given the honour of leading out his country and who’s the youngest skipper to have got his mitts on any silverware?”

“Before Michael Owen and Wayne Rooney started a game up front for England, had a Liverpool-Everton strike pair ever started for England, or any other country?” asks Henry Killworth.

“A friend and I have been arguing about whether his southern English Premiership team or my northern Premiership team has to travel the most during an average football season,” says Anna B. “Has anyone ever calculated whether, say, Southampton travel more miles than, say, Newcastle? Which Premiership club clocks up the most air miles? And does travelling the furthest have an adverse effect on a team’s overall performance?”

“I support Swindon Town, my wife supports Liverpool,” says Tim Beaumont. “Very occasionally both win but more usually one or other loses. This set me wondering: have there ever been any matchdays of maximum happiness for our household? This would involve Swindon and Liverpool winning AND Everton, Manchester United, Oxford United and Bristol City ALL losing, preferably heavily. Is there any way of finding this out?”

“Have two players from the same team ever been sent off for simultaneous challenges on a rival player?” asks Caleb Marwick. “For example, a player chasing back and a closing-down player ever both tackling high on the same man?”

_______

Understanding contemporary art

_____________

Richard Long’s work is highlighted at the 12:00 minute mark in the above film.

Richard Long (artist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Detail of Riverlines installed in the lobby of the Hearst Tower (2006)

Richard Long CBE (born 2 June 1945) is an English sculptor, photographer and painter, one of the best known British land artists. Lin 1972 there was ong is the only artist to be shortlisted for the Turner Prize four times, and he is reputed to have refused the prize in 1984. He was nominated in 1984, 1987, 1988 and he then won the award in 1989 for White Water Line.[1] He currently lives and works in Bristol.[2]

Early life and education

Born in Bristol, England; Long studied at the University of the West of England‘s College of Art during the years of 1962–5, then to Saint Martin’s School of Art, London during 1966–68.[3] At Saint Martin’s, he studied under Anthony Caro and Phillip King, and he became closely associated with fellow student Hamish Fulton.[2] Within a year after he graduated from St Martin’s, the artist became closely associated with the emergence of Land Art; he also participated in the first international manifestations of both Arte Povera, in Amalfi, Italy in 1968, and Earth Art, at Cornell University, New York in 1969.[4]

Work

South Bank Circle by Richard Long, Tate Liverpool, England. (1991)

Long made his international reputation during the 1970s, but already with sculptures made as the result of epic walks, these take him through rural and remote areas in Britain, or as far afield as the plains of Canada, Mongolia and Bolivia.[5] He walks at different times for different reasons. At times, these are predetermined courses and concepts; yet equally, the idea of the walk may assert itself in an arbitrary circumstance.[4] Guided by a great respect for nature and by the formal structure of basic shapes, Long never makes significant alterations to the landscapes he passes through. Instead he marks the ground or adjusts the natural features of a place by up-ending stones for example, or making simple traces. He usually works in the landscape but sometimes uses natural materials in the gallery. Different modes of presentation, sometimes combined, were used to bring his experience of nature back into the museum or gallery. From 1981, Long also alluded to the terms of painting by applying mud in a very liquid state by hand to a wall in similar configurations, establishing a dialogue between the primal gesture of the hand-print and the formal elegance of its display. He stressed that the meaning of his work lay in the visibility of his actions rather than in the representation of a particular landscape.[5] Nearly forty years on, his work continues the dialectic between working freely and ephemerally wherever in the wide world, and bringing it back into the public domain of art spaces and books in the form of sculptures of raw materials such as stones, mud and water and photographic and text works.[4] In 2012 the artist was on view at the exhibition “Ends of the Earth: Land Art bis 1974” with the conceptual and rarely shown work entitled A Walking Line in the Berner Oberland.[6]

A Line Made by Walking (1967)

Small White Pebble Circles Date, Tate Modern, London (1987)

Richard Long, then 22 years old and a student at Saint Martin’s School of Art in London, walked back and forth along a straight line in the grass in the English countryside, leaving a track that he then photographed in black and white.[7] The work, taken as the milestone in contemporary art, balances on the fine line between the performance (action) and the sculpture (object).[8]

Nature has always been a subject of art, from the first cave paintings to twentieth-century landscape photography. I wanted to use the landscape as an artist in new ways. First I started making work outside using natural materials like grass and water, and this led to the idea of making a sculpture by walking. This was a straight line in a grass field, which was also my own path, going ‘nowhere’. In the subsequent early map works, recording very simple but precise walks on Exmoor and Dartmoor, my intention was to make a new art which was also a new way of walking: walking as art. Each walk followed my own unique, formal route, for an original reason, which was different from other categories of walking, like travelling. Each walk, though not by definition conceptual, realised a particular idea. Thus walking – as art – provided a simple way for me to explore relationships between time, distance, geography and measurement. These walks are recorded in my work in the most appropriate way for each different idea: a photograph, a map, or a text work. All these forms feed the imagination.

—Richard Long[9]

Forms

The consistent employment of archetypal shapes, mostly circle, line, cross and spiral, is immediately noticeable in the artist’s body of work. Much as the appearance could evoke ancient monumental connotation, the force of Long’s oeuvre lies in its conceptual simplicity. The work is just as it is staged. Nonetheless, Long does not withdraw himself from believing his actions of connecting simple geometric structures such as circles with organic elements, may reach across cultural and generational boundaries:

“I think circles have belonged in some way or other to all people at all times. They are universal and timeless, like the image of a human hand. For me, that is part of their emotional power, although there is nothing symbolic or mystical in my work.” —Richard Long[10]

Stone, driftwood and mud

Long works with indigenous materials, such as stone, wood and mud, collected from his numerous walks around the world. Stone is one of the earliest material used by man to fashion tools; and one of his preferred materials. Delabole Slate Circle, a solid circle made on the floor with slate from the Delabole quarry in Cornwall, was constructed by slate roughly cut to retain as much of its natural character as possible. The circular arrangement is an imposed order, but the flatness of each piece is characteristic of slate, representing a natural order.[11] River Avon Driftwood (1976) seemed to hold chance and order in equal sway, as in much of Long’s work. It is made up of bits of driftwood which he gathered from the banks of the River Avon below Leigh Woods, near the Clifton Suspension Bridge, Bristol. These are used randomly, and spaced approximately but within the precise form of an anti-clockwise spiral. Objects which arrived at a given point by chance, through the flow of the river, are organised into a logical, and ancient, pattern.[12]

From 1981, he also alluded to the terms of painting by applying mud in a very liquid state by hand to a wall in similar configurations. Long applies the mud with his hands — throwing it, drawing with his fingers or using the imprint of his palms. While he may allow people to watch him place stones, he paints in private. The mud circles, the most impermanent parts of his shows -when the exhibitions are over, the circles are painted over — hold everything together.[13] Mud has represented the ground he stepped through his walks and the realisation of these “murals” establishes a dialogue between the primal gesture of the hand-print and the formal elegance of its display. He stressed that the meaning of his work lay in the visibility of his actions rather than in the representation of a particular landscape.[14]

Bringing together the unevenly shaped raw materials in the geometric structure, Long’s works illustrate a recurrent theme, the relationship between man and nature, as he has explained, “You could say that my work is a balance between the patterns of nature and the formalism of human, abstract ideas like lines and circles. It is where my human characteristics meet the natural forces and patterns of the world, and that is really the kind of subject of my work.”

Nature vs. gallery

Long usually works in the landscape but sometimes uses natural materials in the gallery. The scale of his sculptures is determined by his response to each particular place or landscape locality. In 2000, for the first time, he also presented discrete, modest-sized works that hang on the wall like paintings. They are portable and permanent, a deviation from his typical practice of enacting temporary installations on site.[15]

The outdoor and indoor works are complementary, although I would have to say that nature, the landscape, the walking, is at the heart of my work and informs the indoor works. But the art world is usually received ‘indoors’ and I do have a desire to present real work in public time and space, as opposed to photos, maps and texts, which are by definition ‘second hand’ works. A sculpture feeds the senses at a place, whereas a photograph or text work (from another place) feeds the imagination. For me, these different forms of my work represent freedom and richness – it’s not possible to say ‘everything’ in one way.

I like the fact that every stone is different, one from another, in the same way all fingerprints, or snowflakes (or places) are unique, so no two circles can be alike. In the landscape works, the stones are of the place and remain there. With an indoor sculpture there is a different working rationale. The work is usually first made to fit its first venue in terms of scale, but it is not site-specific; the work is autonomous in that it can be re-made in another space and place. When this happens, there is a specific written procedure to follow. The selection of the stones is usually random; also individual stones will be in different places within the work each time. Nevertheless, it is the ‘same’ work whenever it is re-made.

—Richard Long[5]

At Houghton Hall in Norfolk, the Marquess of Cholmondeley commissioned a folly to the east of the house. Long’s land art consists of a circle of Cornish slate at the end of a path mown through the grass.[16]

A permanent installation is on view in the main lobby of Hearst Tower entitled Riverlines. Completed during the summer of 2006 and the biggest wall work he had ever made – about 35 x 50 feet (11 x 15 meters).[17]

Another permanent installation, Planet Circle (1991), can be seen in Museum De Pont in Tilburg, The Netherlands, or in the Hallen für Neue Kunst Schaffhausen, Switzerland.

Solo exhibitions

Books

  • 2012 South America. Zédélé éditions, Brest, France. First edition: 1972, Konrad Fischer, Düsseldorf.

Group exhibitions

Selected honours and awards

  • 1976 Represented Britain in the British Pavilion at the Venice Biennale, Venice, Italy
  • 1989 Turner Prize, Tate Gallery, London, UK
  • 1990 Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres, French Ministry of Culture, Paris, France
  • 2001 Elected to the Royal Academy of Arts
  • 2005 California Residency Award, For-Site Foundation, USA

Long was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 2013 New Year Honours for services to art.[21][22]

Art market

Long’s Whitechapel Slate Circle (1981) brought a record price price for the artist in 1989 when it sold for $209,000 at Sotheby’s in New York. At another auction in 1992, the piece was estimated far more modestly at $120,000 to $160,000, but bidding never exceeded $110,000;[23] instead, the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. purchased it in 1994 through dealer Anthony d’Offay.

Long is represented by the James Cohan Gallery, located in New York City. He has in the past also shown with Sperone Westwater Gallery, New York, and Haunch of Venison, London.

See also

External links

________________

___

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 67 THE BEATLES (Part Q, RICHES AND LUXURIES NEVER SATISFIED THE BEATLES! ) (Feature on artist Derek Boshier )

_____________ The Beatles were looking for lasting satisfaction in their lives and their journey took them down many of the same paths that other young people of the 1960’s were taking. No wonder in the video THE AGE OF NON-REASON Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 66 THE BEATLES (Part P, The Beatles’ best song ever is A DAY IN THE LIFE which in on Sgt Pepper’s!) (Feature on artist and clothes designer Manuel Cuevas )

  SGT. PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND ALBUM was the Beatles’ finest work and in my view it had their best song of all-time in it. The revolutionary song was A DAY IN THE LIFE which both showed the common place part of everyday life and also the sudden unexpected side of life.  The shocking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 65 THE BEATLES (Part O, The 1960’s SEXUAL REVOLUTION was on the cover of Sgt. Pepper’s!) (Featured artist is Pauline Boty)

_ The Beatles wrote a lot about girls!!!!!! The Beatles – I Want To Hold your Hand [HD] The Beatles – ‘You got to hide your love away’ music video Uploaded on Nov 6, 2007 The Beatles – ‘You got to hide your love away’ music video. The Beatles – Twist and Shout [live] THE […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 64 THE BEATLES (Part P The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s song SHE’S LEAVING HOME according to Schaeffer!!!!) (Featured artist Stuart Sutcliffe)

__________ Melanie Coe – She’s Leaving Home – The Beatles Uploaded on Nov 25, 2010 Melanie Coe ran away from home in 1967 when she was 15. Paul McCartney read about her in the papers and wrote ‘She’s Leaving Home’ for Sgt.Pepper’s. Melanie didn’t know Paul’s song was about her, but actually, the two did […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 63 THE BEATLES (Part O , BECAUSE THE BEATLES LOVED HUMOR IT IS FITTING THAT 6 COMEDIANS MADE IT ON THE COVER OF “SGT. PEPPER’S”!) (Feature on artist H.C. Westermann )

__________________ A Funny Press Interview of The Beatles in The US (1964) Funny Pictures of The Beatles Published on Oct 23, 2012 funny moments i took from the beatles movie; A Hard Days Night ___________________ Scene from Help! The Beatles Funny Clips and Outtakes (Part 1) The Beatles * Wildcat* (funny) Uploaded on Mar 20, […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 62 THE BEATLES (Part N The last 4 people alive from cover of Stg. Pepper’s and the reason Bob Dylan was put on the cover!) (Feature on artist Larry Bell)

_____________________ Great article on Dylan and Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Cover: A famous album by the fab four – The Beatles – is “Sergeant peppers lonely hearts club band“. The album itself is one of the must influential albums of all time. New recording techniques and experiments with different styles of music made this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 61 THE BEATLES (Part M, Why was Karl Marx on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist George Petty)

__________________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview 69 THE BEATLES TWO OF US As a university student, Karl Marx (1818-1883) joined a movement known as the Young Hegelians, who strongly criticized the political and cultural establishments of the day. He became a journalist, and the radical nature of his writings would eventually get him expelled by the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 60 THE BEATLES (Part L, Why was Aleister Crowley on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Jann Haworth )

____________ Aleister Crowley on cover of Stg. Pepper’s: _______________ I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 59 THE BEATLES (Part K, Advocating drugs was reason Aldous Huxley was on cover of Stg. Pepper’s) (Feature on artist Aubrey Beardsley)

(HD) Paul McCartney & Ringo Starr – With a Little Help From My Friends (Live) John Lennon The Final Interview BBC Radio 1 December 6th 1980 A young Aldous Huxley pictured below: _______   Much attention in this post is given to the songs LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS and TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS which […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 58 THE BEATLES (Part J, Why was Carl Gustav Jung on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Richard Merkin)

___________

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS!! Christian de Duve, Nobel Prize-winning Belgian cytologist and biochemist, “There is a complete disassociation between the dogma and belief and the way we scientists approach the search for truth.” (Post includes portion of my 5-15-94 letter to him)(Featured artist is Lisa Blas)

____

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif AhmedHaroon Ahmed,  Jim Al-Khalili, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BateSir Patrick BatesonSimon Blackburn, Colin Blakemore, Ned BlockPascal BoyerPatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky, Brian CoxPartha Dasgupta,  Alan Dershowitz, Frank DrakeHubert Dreyfus, John DunnBart Ehrman, Mark ElvinRichard Ernst, Stephan Feuchtwang, Robert FoleyDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan GreenfieldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan HaidtTheodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Stephen HawkingHermann Hauser, Robert HindeRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodGerard ‘t HooftCaroline HumphreyNicholas Humphrey,  Herbert Huppert,  Gareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart KauffmanMasatoshi Koshiba,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George Lakoff,  Rodolfo LlinasElizabeth Loftus,  Alan MacfarlaneDan McKenzie,  Mahzarin BanajiPeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  P.Z.Myers,   Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff, David Parkin,  Jonathan Parry, Roger Penrose,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceVS RamachandranLisa RandallLord Martin ReesColin RenfrewAlison Richard,  C.J. van Rijsbergen,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerJohn SulstonBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisMax TegmarkNeil deGrasse Tyson,  Martinus J. G. Veltman, Craig Venter.Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John Walker, James D. WatsonFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

Origin, Evolution, and the Future of Life on Earth

___

Ultimate Reality of Christian de Duve

______

The Origin, Evolution & Future of Life (H1150) – Full Video

____

Christian de Duve

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian de Duve
Christian de Duve.tif

de Duve lecturing on the origin of the eukaryotic cell in October 2012
Born Christian René Marie Joseph de Duve
2 October 1917
Thames Ditton, Surrey, Great Britain
Died 4 May 2013 (aged 95)
Grez-Doiceau, Belgium
Residence Belgium
Citizenship Belgian
Nationality Belgium
Fields
Institutions
Alma mater
  • Onze-Lieve-Vrouwecollege
  • Catholic University of Leuven
Known for Cell organelles
Notable awards
Spouse Janine Herman (m. 1943; d. 2008)
Children
  • Two sons, two daughters:
  • Thierry de Duve
  • Alain de Duve
  • Anne de Duve
  • Françoise de Duve

Dutch Queen Beatrix meets 5 Nobel Prize winners: Paul Berg, Christian de Duve, Steven Weinberg, Manfred Eigen, Nicolaas Bloembergen (1983)

Christian René Marie Joseph, Viscount de Duve (2 October 1917 – 4 May 2013) was a Nobel Prize-winning Belgian cytologist and biochemist.[2][3] He made serendipitous discoveries of two cell organelles, peroxisome and lysosome, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1974 with Albert Claude and George E. Palade (“for their discoveries concerning the structural and functional organization of the cell”).[4] In addition to peroxisome and lysosome, he invented the scientific names such as autophagy, endocytosis, and exocytosis in a single occasion.[5][6][7][8][9]

A son of Belgian refugees during the First World War, de Duve was born in Thames Ditton, Surrey, Great Britain.[10] His family returned to Belgium in 1920. He was educated by the Jesuits at Onze-Lieve-Vrouwinstituut in Antwerp, and studied medicine at the Catholic University of Leuven. Upon earning his MD in 1941, he joined research in chemistry, working on insulin and its role in diabetes mellitus. His thesis earned him the highest university degree agrégation de l’enseignement supérieur (equivalent to PhD) in 1945. With his work on the purification of penicillin, he obtained an MSc degree in 1946. He went for further training under (later Nobel Prize winners) Hugo Theorell at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, and Carl and Gerti Cori at the Washington University in St. Louis. He joined the faculty of medicine at Leuven in 1947. In 1960 he was invited to the Rockfeller Institute (now Rockefeller University). With mutual arrangement with Leuven, he became professor in both universities from 1962, dividing his time between Leuven and New York. He became emeritus professor of Leuven university in 1985, and of Rockefeller in 1988.

De Duve was decorated with Viscount in 1989 by King Baudouin of Belgium. He was also a recipient of Francqui Prize, Gairdner Foundation International Award, Heineken Prize, and E. B. Wilson Medal. In 1974 he founded the International Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology in Brussels, eventually renamed the de Duve Institute in 2005. He was the founding President of the L’Oréal-UNESCO Awards for Women in Science.[11]

He died on 4 May (Saturday) 2013 by self-induced euthanasia in the presence of all of his children.[12]

Early life and education[edit]

De Duve was born of a shopkeeper Alphonse de Duve and wife Madeleine Pungs in the village of Thames Ditton, near London. His parents fled Belgium at the outbreak of the First World War. After the war in 1920, at age three, he and his family returned to Belgium. He was a precocious boy, always the best student (primus perpetuus as he recalled) in school, except for one year when he was pronounced “out of competition” to give chance to other students.[2] He was educated by the Jesuits at Onze-Lieve-Vrouwinstituut in Antwerp, before studying at the Catholic University of Leuven in 1934.[13] He wanted to specialize in endocrinology and joined the laboratory of the Belgian physiologist Joseph P. Bouckaert. During his last year at medical school in 1940, the Germans invaded Belgium. He was drafted to the Belgian army, and posted in southern France as medical officer. There, he was almost immediately taken as prisoner of war by Germans. But fortunate of his ability to speak fluent German and Flemish, he outwitted his captors and escaped back to Belgium. (The adventure he later described as “more comical than heroic”.)[14] He immediately continued his medical course, and obtained his MD in 1941 from Leuven. His primary research was on insulin and its role in glucose metabolism. He made an initial discovery that a commercial preparation of insulin was contaminated with another pancreatic hormone, the insulin antagonist glucagon. However, laboratory supplies at Leuven were in shortage, he therefore enrolled in a programme to earn a degree in chemistry at the Cancer Institute. His research on insulin was summed up in a 400-page book titled Glucose, Insuline et Diabète (Glucose, Insulin and Diabetes) published in 1945, simultaneously in Brussels and Paris. The book was condensed into a technical dissertation which earned him the most advanced degree at the university level agrégation de l’enseignement supérieur (an equivalent of a doctorate – he called it “a sort of glorified Ph.D.”) in 1945.[14] His thesis was followed by a number of scientific publications.[15] He subsequently obtained MSc in chemistry in 1946, for which he worked on the purification of penicillin.[16][17] To enhance his skill in biochemistry, he trained in the laboratory of Hugo Theorell (who later won The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1955) at the Nobel Medical Institute in Stockholm for 18 months during 1946-1947. In 1947 he received a financial assistance as Rockefeller Foundation fellow and worked for six months with Carl and Gerti Cori‘s at Washington University in St. Louis (the husband and wife were joint winners of The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1947).[18]

Career and research[edit]

In March 1947 de Duve joined the faculty of the medical school of the Catholic University of Leuven teaching physiological chemistry. In 1951 he became full professor. In 1960 Detlev Bronk, the then president of the Rockfeller Institute (what is now Rockefeller University) of New York City, met him at Brussels and offered him professorship and a laboratory. The rector of Leuven, afraid of entirely losing de Duve, made a compromise over dinner that de Duve would still be under part-time appointment with a relief from teaching and conducting examinations. The rector and Bronk made an agreement which would intilally last for five years. The official implementation was in 1962, and de Duve simultaneously headed the research laboratories at Leuven and at Rockefeller University, dividing his time between New York and Leuven.[19] In 1969 the Leuven university was split into two separate universities. He joined the French-speaking side of Université catholique de Louvain. He took emeritus status at Université catholique de Louvain in 1985 and at Rockefeller in 1988, though he continued to conduct research. Among other subjects, he studied the distribution of enzymes in rat liver cells using rate-zonal centrifugation. His work on cell fractionation provided an insight into the function of cell structures. He specialized in subcellular biochemistry and cell biology and discovered new cell organelles.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]

Personal life[edit]

De Duve was brought up as a Roman Catholic. In his later years he tended towards agnosticism, if not strict atheism.[67][68] However, de Duve also thought that “Most biologists, today, tend to see life and mind as cosmic imperatives, written into the very fabric of the universe, rather than as extraordinarily improbable products of chance.[69] “It would be an exaggeration to say I’m not afraid of death,” he explicitly said to a Belgian newspaper Le Soir just a month before his death, “but I’m not afraid of what comes after, because I’m not a believer.”[70][71] He strongly supported biological evolution as a fact, and dismissive of creation science and intelligent design, as explicitly stated in his last book, Genetics of Original Sin: The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity. He was among the seventy-eight Nobel laureates in science to endorse the effort to repeal Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.[72]

De Duve married Janine Herman on 30 September 1943. Together they had had two sons, Thierry and Alain, and two daughters, Anne and Françoise. Janine died in 2008, aged 86.[16]

Death[edit]

De Duve died on 4 May 2013, at his home in Nethen, Belgium, at the age of 95. He decided to end his life by legal euthanasia, performed by two doctors before his four children. He had been long suffering from cancer and atrial fibrillation, and his health problems were exacerbated by a recent fall in his home. He is survived by two sons and two daughters; two brothers, Pierre and Daniel; seven grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren.[73][74][75]

De Duve was cremated as he had willed, and his ashes were distributed among family members and friends.[3]

Awards and honours[edit]

De Duve won the Francqui Prize for Biological and Medical Sciences in 1960, and the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1974. King Baudouin of Belgium honoured him to Viscount in 1989.[16] He was the recipient of the Canada Gairdner International Award in 1967, and the Dr H.P. Heineken Prize for Biochemistry and Biophysics in 1973 from the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. He was elected a foreign associate of the US National Academy of Sciences in 1975. He won the Harden Medal of the Biochemical Society of Great Britain in 1978; the Theobald Smith Award from the Albany Medical College in 1981; the Jimenez Diaz Award in 1985; the Innovators of Biochemistry Award from Medical College of Virginia in 1986; and the E. B. Wilson Medal from the American Society for Cell Biology in 1989.[76] He was also a member of the Royal Academies of Medicine and the Royal Academy of Sciences, Arts, and of Literature of Belgium; the Pontifical Academy of Sciences of the Vatican; the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; the French National Academy of Medicine; the Academy of Sciences of Paris; the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina; the American Philosophical Society. He was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS) in 1988.[1] In addition, he received honorary doctorates from eighteen universities around the world.[18]

Legacy[edit]

De Duve founded a multidisciplinary biomedical research institute at Université catholique de Louvain in 1974, called the International Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology (ICP), and later renamed “de Duve Institute.”[77] He remained its president until 1991. On his 80th birthday in 1997 it was renamed the Christian de Duve Institute of Cellular Pathology. In 2005 it was further contracted to simply the de Duve Institute.[78]

De Duve was one of the founding members of the Belgian Society of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, established on 15 September 1951.[79]

De Duve is remembered as an inventor of important scientific terminology. He coined the word lysosome in 1955, peroxisome in 1966, and autophagy, endocytosis, and exocytosis in one instance at the Ciba Foundation Symposium on Lysosomes held in London during 12–14 February 1963, while he, “was in a word-coining mood.”[21][80]

De Duve’s life, including his work resulting in a Nobel Prize, and his passion for biology is the subject of a documentary film Portrait of a Nobel Prize: Christian de Duve (Portrait de Nobel : Christian de Duve), directed by Aurélie Wijnants. It was first aired on Eurochannel in 2012.[81]

__

In  the third video below in the 144th clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

____

Quote from Christian de Duve in the film series “A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)” and my response below ( Original interview was in 2005 and was conducted by Harry Kroto at the annual Lindau meeting):

Of course, I fully agree with you and I think with most of my fellow scientists. There is a complete disassociation between the dogma and belief and the way we scientists approach the search for truth.   And so obviously as a scientist and being brought up as a Catholic I could not safely continue accepting the teaching of the church. 

Let me make two observations here.

FIRST, I think a person needs to take time examine the historical accuracy of the Bible. If the Bible is true then history and historical records should have something to say about that.

Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject and if you like you could just google these subjects: 1. The Babylonian Chronicleof Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism)4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites6.Shishak Smiting His Captives7. Moabite Stone8Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets10. Cyrus Cylinder11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E.12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription13. The Pilate Inscription14. Caiaphas Ossuary14 B Pontius Pilate Part 214c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.,

SECOND, if there is no lasting meaning to life then CHANCE RULES. Let me discuss that a little more below.

Christian de Duve was very critical of Creationism!!!

Chrisian de Duve was a very sharp critic of creationism even though he grew up in a family that who were committed Catholics. In the Wikipedia article cited above we read these words:

“Most biologists, today, tend to see life and mind as cosmic imperatives, written into the very fabric of the universe, rather than as extraordinarily improbable products of chance.[69] “It would be an exaggeration to say I’m not afraid of death,” he explicitly said to a Belgian newspaper Le Soir just a month before his death, “but I’m not afraid of what comes after, because I’m not a believer.”[70][71] He strongly supported biological evolution as a fact, and dismissive of creation science and intelligent design, as explicitly stated in his last book, Genetics of Original Sin: The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity. He was among the seventy-eight Nobel laureates in science to endorse the effort to repeal Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.[72]

I do want to salute him for at least taking a careful look and seeing that there were clearly two different paths we can take philosophically. We can either realize that the answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and the Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. Or we have to say that it is all by CHANCE. Below are the words of Christian de Duve: 

“The answer of modern molecular biology to this much-debated question is categorical: chance, and chance alone, did it all, from primeval soup to man, with only natural selection to sift its effects. This affirmation now rests on overwhelming factual evidence.”

A Guided Tour Of The Living Cell, Volume Two, Page 357
Scientific American Library, 1984

Portion of my 5-15-94 letter to Christian de Duve

On May 15, 1994 on the 10th anniversary of the passing of Francis Schaeffer I attempted to send a letter to almost every living Nobel Prize winner and I believe  Dr.Christian de Duve  was probably among that group and here is a portion of that letter below:

I have enclosed a cassette tape by Adrian Rogers and it includes  a story about  Charles Darwin‘s journey from  the position of theistic evolution to agnosticism. Here are the four bridges that Adrian Rogers says evolutionists can’t cross in the CD  “Four Bridges that the Evolutionist Cannot Cross.” 1. The Origin of Life and the law of biogenesis. 2. The Fixity of the Species. 3.The Second Law of Thermodynamics. 4. The Non-Physical Properties Found in Creation.  

 

Adrian Rogers is pictured below and Francis Schaeffer above.

In the first 3 minutes of the cassette tape is the hit song “Dust in the Wind.” Below I have given you some key points  Francis Schaeffer makes about the experiment that Solomon undertakes in the book of Ecclesiastes to find satisfaction by  looking into  learning (1:16-18), laughter, ladies, luxuries,  and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20).

Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.”

Here the first 7 verses of Ecclesiastes followed by Schaeffer’s commentary on it:

The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun? A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever. The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises. The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.  

Solomon is showing a high degree of comprehension of evaporation and the results of it.  Seeing also in reality nothing changes. There is change but always in a set framework and that is cycle. You can relate this to the concepts of modern man. Ecclesiastes is the only pessimistic book in the Bible and that is because of the place where Solomon limits himself. He limits himself to the question of human life, life under the sun between birth and death and the answers this would give.

Solomon doesn’t place man outside of the cycle. Man doesn’t escape the cycle. Man is in the cycle. Birth and death and youth and old age.

There is no doubt in my mind that Solomon had the same experience in his life that I had as a younger man (at the age of 18 in 1930). I remember standing by the sea and the moon arose and it was copper and beauty. Then the moon did not look like a flat dish but a globe or a sphere since it was close to the horizon. One could feel the global shape of the earth too. Then it occurred to me that I could contemplate the interplay of the spheres and I was exalted because I thought I can look upon them with all their power, might, and size, but they could contempt nothing. Then came upon me a horror of great darkness because it suddenly occurred to me that although I could contemplate them and they could contemplate nothing yet they would continue to turn in ongoing cycles when I saw no more forever and I was crushed.

Watching the film HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? in 1979 impacted my life greatly

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

 

_______

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Schaeffer noted that Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

  1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
  2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13 “I have seen something else under the sun:  The race is not to the swift
    or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant  or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.  Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times  that fall unexpectedly upon them.”)
  3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1; “Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—
    and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—  and they have no comforter.” 7:15 “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness,  and the wicked living long in their wickedness. ).
  4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).
  5. There is no ultimate lasting meaning in life. (1:2)

By the way, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes finishes with Solomon emphasizing that serving God is the only proper response of man. Solomon looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture in the final chapter of the book in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, “ Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.  For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. In 1978 I heard the song “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas when it rose to #6 on the charts. That song told me that Kerry Livgren the writer of that song and a member of Kansas had come to the same conclusion that Solomon had and that “all was meaningless UNDER THE SUN,” and looking ABOVE THE SUN was the only option.  I remember mentioning to my friends at church that we may soon see some members of Kansas become Christians because their search for the meaning of life had obviously come up empty even though they had risen from being an unknown band to the top of the music business and had all the wealth and fame that came with that.

Livgren wrote, “All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Both Kerry Livgren and Dave Hope of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and Dave Hope had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981.  Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible Church. Hope is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

Evergreen Art Lecture Series – Lisa Blas

Featured artist today is Lisa Blas

 

________

 Regarding Territories and Bodies / Lisa Blas Installation view Salve Regina Art Gallery Catholic University of America Washington, DC 2009

Regarding Territories and Bodies / Lisa Blas
Installation view
Salve Regina Art Gallery
Catholic University of America
Washington, DC
2009

LISA BLAS

BRUSSELS, BELGIUM | BY JANUARY 31, 2011

Most people who know me understand that I can be rather impatient when it comes to waiting. The anticipation of visiting friend and colleague  Lisa Blas in her new home and studio in Brussels, Belgium certainly challenged this not so virtuous quality of mine. I planned the trip around visits with friends and relatives in nearby Antwerp and The Hague. The triangulation of these three cities of family and friends seemed a perfect reason to make a post-holiday season jaunt across the pond from Washington D.C.

Lisa is a multi-media artist and former Washingtonian who taught at The Corcoran College of Art and Design for many years.  She moved to Belgium in January 2010 to join her fiancé who is an art historian.  Since moving to Belgium, Lisa has taught at Tourcoing, France as a visiting artist and currently is an artist-in-residence in Ors, France.

After getting slightly lost on that rainy afternoon, I finally arrived one hour late to Lisa’s art deco building on the west side of Brussels. Feet sore with a new camera in hand (after having my original equipment stolen the day before in an Antwerp elevator) I made my way up the winding staircase and emerged into her light filled apartment — walls lined with books, plants and art. I was greeted with a much needed glass of water and a comfy chair. After showing me around her place, we shortly left her apartment and walked up to another floor to one of the smallest studios I have ever been in — measuring not more than eight feet square. It previously had been a storage space and was recently emptied and converted into a private studio for Lisa. A large window and a balcony helped to make the space seem bigger than its jewel box size. And it was jewel like. Her new collage work looked like constellations on the wall as it reflected back onto a thin mirror hanging exactly opposite from it. Shards of tiny cut colored geometric shapes deliberately placed on each page created abstract compositions dancing over tiles of paper. A playground lay below and faint voices of children playing could be heard. For a moment I felt mesmerized.

Lisa’s previous work that I was familiar with was based on a journey she began in 2003 throughout the United States where she examined archives from the mid-nineteenth to early twentieth century  “that point to the American sensibility in all its complexities and nuances.” This research became the source of a solo show titled “Meet Me At the Mason Dixon” in 2008.  She had paintings, photographs and installation that were specific to the lands she traversed and the social history they embodied.

She states: “Traveling engenders activities of documentation and collection. It is akin to plein air observation that is later brought back to the studio for assembly. Such travels have convinced me of the relevance of the nineteenth century for our present-day experience. When I set to work with materials, I am reminded of Walter Benjamin’s idea: ‘For every image of the past that is not recognized by the present as one of its own concerns threatens to disappear irretrievably’ ”.

Lisa recently travelled to India and Brazil, but most significantly this past spring to Los Angeles, where she attended her father’s funeral. It is this experience of her father passing that has inspired her recent collage work that lines the walls of her intimate studio as well as the large table in her dining room. She talks about how these little triangular shards (in the collages) originate from a photography project five years earlier.

At that time, Lisa began collecting Hallmark sympathy cards, folded them into airplane like shapes and photographed them as ephemeral, sculptural objects. These images began as a study of the form and language of mass culture, especially as they relate to expressions of grief—perhaps the most difficult emotion to articulate.  Since her father’s death, these images have now taken on another level of complexity and meaning. In the collages, she begins by looking for specific colored paper and card stock that arrives in the mail. She then cuts this material into varying shapes, echoing the Hallmark cards and literally composes them onto music composition paper.

She discussed three exhibitions she had recently seen of Felix Gonzalez-Torres, Fred Sandback and Henri Matisse that have fueled her current practice. Elaborating more on the Matisse exhibition in Chicago she visited last year called “Matisse: Radical Invention 1913 -1917” Lisa reflects, “As the exhibition focused on the time period of World War I (another coincidence), his experimentation with new forms of picture construction, and their unfinished quality, had a great impact on me. This interstitial, and perhaps restless period in his life as a painter seems to echo our contemporary moment in many ways. In speaking about his painting The Moroccans, Matisse reportedly said ‘…that everything that did not contribute to the balance and rhythm of [this work], had to be eliminated…as you would prune a tree’.”

I imagine Lisa quietly working at her table and in her yellow studio cutting delicate shapes to create these soundless compositions that resonate with so much personal meaning. The transformation she has made from focusing on travel that is physical and external, to a journey that is internal and now manifest in a form of a highly controlled cultural abstraction is a process of pruning I will continue to follow.

A solo exhibition of her work will be at Gettysburg College in Pennsylvania opening late August 2011 to coincide with the Sesquicentennial Anniversary of the Civil War. This exhibit is being curated by Shannon Egan.

You can see Lisa’s work in other upcoming group shows here in the U.S. at the Maryland Art Place in Baltimore, and this summer at Addison Ripley Fine Art in Washington D.C.

For more information visit her website at www.lisablas.com

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

______________   George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

  The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

__________________   Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute  episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 45 Woody Allen “Reason is Dead” (Feature on artists Allora & Calzadilla )

Love and Death [Woody Allen] – What if there is no God? [PL] ___________ _______________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 44 The Book of Genesis (Featured artist is Trey McCarley )

___________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: ____________________________ Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?) Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro) Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1) Dr. Francis Schaeffer […]

__

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS! Part 118 Max Perutz, Cambridge, molecular biologist, “I don’t think we should upset those people who [believe in religion] , who are a very large number of reasonable and decent people”

__

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif AhmedHaroon Ahmed,  Jim Al-Khalili, Louise Antony, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BateSir Patrick BatesonSimon Blackburn, Colin Blakemore, Ned BlockPascal BoyerPatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky, Brian CoxPartha Dasgupta,  Alan Dershowitz, Frank DrakeHubert Dreyfus, John Dunn, Ken EdwardsBart Ehrman, Mark ElvinRichard Ernst, Stephan Feuchtwang, Robert FoleyDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan Greenfield, Stephen Jay GouldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan Haidt, Chris Hann,  Theodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Stephen HawkingHermann Hauser, Peter HiggsRobert HindeRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodGerard ‘t HooftCaroline HumphreyNicholas Humphrey,  Herbert Huppert,  Sir Andrew Fielding HuxleyGareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart KauffmanMasatoshi Koshiba,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George Lakoff,  Rodolfo Llinas, Seth Lloyd,  Elizabeth Loftus,  Alan Macfarlane, Colin McGinnDan McKenzie,  Mahzarin Banaji, Michael MannPeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  P.Z.Myers,   Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff, David Parkin,  Jonathan Parry, Roger Penrose,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceVS RamachandranLisa RandallLord Martin ReesColin RenfrewAlison Richard,  C.J. van Rijsbergen,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerJohn SulstonBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisMax Tegmark, Michael Tooley,  Neil deGrasse Tyson,  Martinus J. G. Veltman, Craig Venter.Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John Walker, James D. WatsonFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

Max Perutz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Max Perutz
Max Perutz.jpg

Perutz in 1962, age 52
Born Max Ferdinand Perutz
19 May 1914
Vienna, Austria-Hungary
Died 6 February 2002 (aged 87)
Cambridge, Cambridgeshire,England
Nationality British
Fields Molecular biology,Crystallography
Institutions University of Cambridge,Laboratory of Molecular Biology
Alma mater University of Vienna
Peterhouse, Cambridge
Doctoral advisor J.D. Bernal
Doctoral students Francis Crick; John Keith Moffat
Known for Heme-containing proteins
Notable awards
Spouse Gisela Clara Peiser (m. 1942; 2 children)

Max Ferdinand Perutz OM CH CBE FRS (19 May 1914 – 6 February 2002)[1] was an Austrian-born British molecular biologist, who shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for Chemistry with John Kendrew, for their studies of the structures of hemoglobin and myoglobin. He went on to win the Royal Medal of the Royal Society in 1971 and the Copley Medal in 1979. At Cambridge he founded and chaired (1962–79) The Medical Research Council Laboratory of Molecular Biology, fourteen of whose scientists have won Nobel Prizes. Perutz’s contributions to molecular biology in Cambridge are documented in The History of the University of Cambridge: Volume 4 (1870 to 1990) published by the Cambridge University Press in 1992.

Early life[edit]

Perutz was born in Vienna, the son of Adele “Dely” (Goldschmidt) and Hugo Perutz, a textile manufacturer.[2][3] His parents were Jewish by ancestry, but had baptized Perutz in the Catholic religion.[4][5][6] Although Perutz rejected religion and was an atheist in his later years, he was against offending others for their religious beliefs.[7][8]

Career[edit]

His parents hoped that he would become a lawyer, but he became interested in chemistry while at school. Overcoming his parents’ objections he enrolled as a chemistry undergraduate at the University of Vienna and completed his degree in 1936. Made aware by lecturer Fritz von Wessely of the advances being undertaken at the University of Cambridge into biochemistry by a team led by Gowland Hopkins, he asked Professor Marks who was soon to visit Cambridge to make inquiries to Hopkins about whether there would be a place for him. However Marks forgot. However he had visited J.D. Bernal, who was looking for a research student to assist him with studies into X-ray crystallography.[9] Perutz was dismayed as he knew nothing about the subject. Marks countered by saying that he would soon learn. Bernal accepted him as a research student in his crystallography research group at Cavendish Laboratory. His father had deposited ₤500 with his London agent to support him. He learnt quickly. Bernal encouraged him to use the X-ray diffraction method to study the structure of proteins. As protein crystals were difficult to obtain he used horse haemoglobin crystals, and began his doctoral thesis on its structure. Haemoglobin was a subject which was to occupy him for most of his professional career. He completed his PhD. under William Lawrence Bragg.

Rejected by Kings and St John’s colleges he applied to and became a member of Peterhouse, on the basis that it served the best food. He was elected an Honorary Fellow of Peterhouse in 1962. He took a keen interest in the Junior Members, and was a regular and popular speaker at the Kelvin Club, the College’s scientific society.

World War 2[edit]

When Hitler took over Austria in 1938 Perutz’s parents managed to escape to Switzerland, but lost all of their money. As a result, Perutz lost their financial support. With his ability to ski, experience in mountaineering since childhood and his knowledge of crystals Perutz was accepted as a member of a three-man team to study the conversion of snow into ice in Swiss glaciers in the summer of 1938. His resulting article for the Proceedings of the Royal Society made him known as an expert on glaciers.[10]

Lawrence Bragg who was head of the Professor of Experimental Physics at Cavendish, thought that Perutz’s research into haemoglobin had promise and encouraged him to apply for a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation to continue his research. The application was accepted in January 1939 and with the money Perutz was able to bring his parents from Switzerland in March 1939 to England.[10]

On the outbreak of World War II Perutz was rounded up along with other persons of German or Austrian background, and sent to Newfoundland (on orders from Winston Churchill).[11] After being interned for several months he returned to Cambridge. Because of his previous research into the changes in the arrangement of the crystals in the different layers of a glacier before the War he was asked for advice on whether if a battalion of commandos were landed in Norway, could they be hidden in shelters under glaciers. His knowledge on the subject of ice then lead to him in 1942 being recruited for Project Habakkuk. This was a secret project to build an ice platform in mid-Atlantic, which could be used to refuel aircraft. To that end he investigated the recently invented mixture of ice and woodpulp known as pykrete. He carried out early experiments on pykrete in a secret location underneath Smithfield Meat Market in the City of London.

Establishment of the Molecular Biology Unit[edit]

After the War he returned briefly to glaciology. He demonstrated how glaciers flow.[12][13][14][15][16]

In 1947 Perutz, with the support of Professor Bragg was successful in obtaining support from the Medical Research Council (MRC) to undertake research into the molecular structure of biological systems. This financial support allowed him to establish the Molecular Biology Unit at the Cavendish Laboratory.[17] Perutz’s new unit attracted researchers who realized that the field of molecular biology had great promise, among them was Francis Crick in 1949 and James D. Watson in 1951.

In 1953 Perutz showed that diffracted X-rays from protein crystals could be phased by comparing the patterns from crystals of the protein with and without heavy atoms attached. In 1959 he employed this method to determine the molecular structure of the protein hemoglobin, which transports oxygen in the blood.[citation needed] This work resulted in his sharing with John Kendrew the 1962 Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Nowadays the molecular structures of several thousand proteins are determined by X-ray crystallography every year.

After 1959, Perutz and his colleagues went on to determine the structure of oxy- and deoxy- hemoglobin at high resolution. As a result, in 1970, he was at last able to suggest how it works as a molecular machine: how it switches between its deoxygenated and its oxygenated states, in turn triggering the uptake of oxygen and then its release to the muscles and other organs. Further work over the next two decades refined and corroborated the proposed mechanism. In addition Perutz studied the structural changes in a number of hemoglobin diseases and how these might affect oxygen binding. He hoped that the molecule could be made to function as a drug receptor and that it would be possible to inhibit or reverse the genetic errors such as those that occur in sickle cell anemia. A further interest was the variation of the hemoglobin molecule from species to species to suit differing habitats and patterns of behavior. In his final years Perutz turned to the study of changes in protein structures implicated in Huntington and other neurodegenerative diseases. He demonstrated that the onset of Huntington disease is related to the number of glutamine repeats as they bind to form what he called a polar zipper.[18]

DNA structure and Rosalind Franklin[edit]

Perutz with his wife Gisela at the 1962 Nobel ball

During the early 1950s, while Watson and Crick were determining the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), they made use of unpublished X-ray diffraction images taken by Rosalind Franklin, shown at meetings and shared with them by Maurice Wilkins, and of Franklin’s preliminary account of her detailed analysis of the X-ray images included in an unpublished 1952 progress report for the King’s College laboratory of Sir John Randall. Randall and others eventually criticized the manner in which Perutz gave a copy of this report to Watson and Crick.

It is debatable whether Watson and Crick should have been granted access to Franklin’s results without her knowledge or permission, and before she had a chance to publish a detailed analysis of the content of her unpublished progress report. It is also not clear how important the content of that report had been for Watson and Crick’s modeling. In an effort to clarify this issue, Perutz later published the report, arguing that it included nothing that Franklin had not said in a talk she gave in late 1951, which Watson had attended. Perutz also added that the report was addressed to an MRC committee created in order to “establish contact between the different groups of people working for the Council”. Randall’s and Perutz’s labs were both funded by the MRC.

The author[edit]

In his later years, Perutz was a regular reviewer/essayist for The New York Review of Books on biomedical subjects. Many of these essays are reprinted in his 1998 book I wish I had made you angry earlier.[19] In August 1985 The New Yorker also published his account tiled “That Was the War: Enemy Alien” of his experiences as an internee during World War 2. Perutz’s flair for writing was a late development. His relative Leo Perutz, a distinguished writer, told Max when he was a boy that he would never be a writer, an unwarranted judgement, as demonstrated by Perutz’s remarkable letters written as an undergraduate. They are published in What a Time I Am Having: Selected Letters of Max Perutz. Perutz was delighted to win the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science in 1997.

The scientist-citizen[edit]

Perutz attacked the theories of philosophers Sir Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn and biologist Richard Dawkins in a lecture given at Cambridge on ‘Living Molecules’ in 1994. He criticised Popper’s notion that science progresses through a process of hypothesis formation and refutation, saying that hypotheses are not necessarily the basis of scientific research and, in molecular biology at least, they are not necessarily subject to revision either. For Perutz, Kuhn’s notion that science advances in paradigm shifts that are subject to social and cultural pressures is an unfair representation of modern science.

These criticisms extended to scientists who attack religion, in particular to Richard Dawkins. Statements which offend religious faith were for Perutz tactless and simply damage the reputation of science. They are of quite a different order to criticism of the demonstrably false theory of creationism. He concluded that “even if we do not believe in God, we should try to live as though we did.”[20]

Within days of the 11 September attacks in 2001, Perutz wrote to British Prime Minister Tony Blair, appealing to him not to respond with military force: “I am alarmed by the American cries for vengeance and concerned that President Bush’s retaliation will lead to the death of thousands more innocent people, driving us into a world of escalating terror and counter-terror. I do hope that you can use your restraining influence to prevent this happening.”[21]

Honours and awards[edit]

Perutz was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) in 1954.[1] In addition to the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1962, which he shared with John Kendrew for their studies of the structures of hemoglobin and myoglobin, Max Perutz received a number of other important honours: he was appointed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire in 1963, received the Austrian Decoration for Science and Art in 1967, the Royal Medal of the Royal Society in 1971, appointed a Companion of Honour in 1975, received the Copley Medal in 1979 and the Order of Merit in 1988.

Perutz was made a Member of the German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina in 1964, received an Honorary doctorate from the University of Vienna (1965) and received the Wilhelm Exner Medal in 1967.[22]

Lectures[edit]

In 1980 he was invited to deliver the Royal Institution Christmas Lecture on The Chicken, the Egg and the Molecules.

Personal life[edit]

In 1942, Perutz married Gisela Clara Mathilde Peiser (1915-2005), a medical photographer. They had two children, Vivien (b. 1944), an art historian; and Robin (b. 1949), a professor of Chemistry at the University of York. Gisela was a refugee from Germany (she was a Protestant whose own father had been born Jewish).[23]

He was cremated on 12 February 2002 at Cambridge Crematorium (Cambridgeshire) and his ashes interred with his parents Hugo Perutz and Dely Perutz in the Parish of the Ascension Burial Ground in Cambridge.[24] His wife was cremated on 28 December 2005 and her ashes were interred in the same grave.

Books by Max Perutz[edit]

  • 1962. Proteins and Nucleic Acids: Structure and Function. Amsterdam and London. Elsevier
  • 1989. Is Science Necessary? Essays on science and scientists. London. Barrie and Jenkins. ISBN 0-7126-2123-7
  • 1990. Mechanisms of Cooperativity and Allosteric Regulation in Proteins. Cambridge. Cambridge University PressISBN 0-521-38648-9
  • 1992. Protein Structure : New Approaches to Disease and Therapy. New York. Freeman (ISBN 0-7167-7021-0)
  • 1997. Science is Not a Quiet Life : Unravelling the Atomic Mechanism of Haemoglobin. Singapore. World Scientific. ISBN 981-02-3057-5
  • 2002. I Wish I’d Made You Angry Earlier.Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 978-0-87969-674-0
  • 2009. What a Time I Am Having: Selected Letters of Max Perutz edited by Vivien Perutz. Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 978-0-87969-864-5

____

 ____

In  the second video below in the 77th clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2)

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

________

Max Perutz asserted:   “….we should fight creationism and when asked say we don’t believe in religion. I don’t think we should upset those people who do, who are a very large number of reasonable and decent people.”

 

Sometimes people like Max Perutz get mad at people like Richard Dawkins but I see where Dawkins is coming from because he feels strongly about what he feels is the truth.

Let me respond with three points.

FIRST, Christ commands us Christians to tell everyone about the gospel because there is a day of Judgment coming.

Matthew 24:14: “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.”

Revelation 14:6-7: “Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth—to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people— saying with a loud voice, ‘Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.’”

My former pastor at Bellevue Baptist Church, Adrian Rogers in his sermon A PLACE CALLED HELL noted:

The late, great Dr. Robert G. Lee, who was the pastor of this church, said this, and I wrote it down, he said, ”I know some people call the preacher who stands squarely upon the teaching of Christ and his apostles narrow, harsh, cruel.” then he said, ”as to being narrow, I have no desire to any broader than was Jesus. As to being cruel, is it cruel to tell a man the truth? Is a man to be called cruel who declares the whole counsel of God and points out to men their danger? Is it cruel to arouse sleeping people to the fact that the house is on fire? Is it cruel to jerk a blind man away from the rattlesnake in the coil? Is it cruel to declare to people the deadliness of disease and tell them which medicine to take?” and then dr. Lee said this; he said, ”I had rather be called cruel for being kind, than to be called kind for being cruel.”

The cruelest thing a man could do would be to fail to warn people about what the bible has to say about hell. To speak sneeringly, disparagingly about a preacher who believes in hell, to ridicule a preacher who warns of hell would be the same as to ridicule a doctor who warns of cancer. It’s not a pleasant subject, but it is a fact. And I’m going to tell you, dear friend, that the idea of hell is ridiculed today. And, I know why it is ridiculed today, because people don’t like the idea and they try to laugh it away. You can laugh your way into hell, but you can’t laugh your way out once you’re there.

SECOND, the answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted and a person can investigate some evidence that the Bible is accurate at this link.

THIRD, without God in the picture everything is permitted. Woody Allen demonstrated this brilliantly in his 1989 film CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS. I bring this up because I read this below:

  • “All is lawful.”
    – Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov
  • “Viper will eat viper, and it would serve them both right!”
    – Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov
  • “If you were to destroy in mankind the belief in immortality, not only love but every living force maintaining the life of the world would at once be dried up. Moreover, nothing then would be immoral; everything would be lawful, even cannibalism.”
    – Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

“Scientists may not believe in God, but they should be taught why they ought to behave as if they did.”(9)

Max Perutz, with a Nobel prize in chemistry, made this statement several years ago in response to critical remarks about Cambridge University establishing a Lectureship in Theology and Natural Science. Richard Dawkins, outspoken biologist and atheist, could barely contain himself in an editorial letter about the same lectureship: “The achievements of theologians don’t do anything, don’t affect anything, don’t achieve anything. What makes you think that ‘theology’ is a subject at all?”(10)

Julian Huxley evidently agreed with Perutz because Huxley also wrote, “God does not in fact exist, but act as if He does!” Woody Allen addressed the same point in his movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS and I have written this same subject over and over and over  again on this blog.

Francis Schaeffer’s comments on Huxley’s quote:

Relieving the Tension in the West

In  both the East and the West, however, there are attempts to relieve the tension of seeming to be nothing, while in fact being something very real – a person in a real world which has a definite form. On the materialist side, Sir Julian Huxley (1887-1975) has clarified the dilemma by acknowledging, though he was an atheist, that somehow or other – against all that one might expect – a person functions better if he acts as though God exists. “So,” the argument goes, “God does not in fact exist, but act as if He does!” As observed by the Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906) in The Wild Duck: “Rob the average man of his life-illusion, and you rob him of his happiness at the same stroke.” In other words, according to Huxley, you can function properly only if you live your whole life upon a lie. You act as if God exists, which to the materialist is false. At first this sounds like a feasible solution for relieving the tension produced by a materialist world-view. However, a moment’s reflection shows what a terrible solution it is. You will find no deeper despair than this for a sensitive person. This is no optimistic, happy, reasonable, brilliant answer. It is darkness and death.
Another way the tension is relieved is through the theory of evolution, the idea that by chance there is an increasing advance. People are given an impression of progress – up from the primeval slime and the amoeba, up through the evolutionary chain, with life developing by chance from the simple carbon molecule to the complex, right up to the pinnacle, mankind.
This is not the place to discuss evolutionary theory, but it surprises us how readily people accept it, even on the scientific side, as if it had no problems. There are problems, even if these are not commonly realized or discussed.89 The primary point we are interested in, however, is not evolution itself but the illusion of “progress” which has been granted by it. By chance, this amazing complexity called “man” has been generated out of the slime. So, of course, there is progress! By this argument people are led into imagining that the whole of reality does have purpose even if, as we have said, there is no way that it really can have purpose within the humanistic world-view.
Evolution makes men and women feel superior and at the top of the pile, but in the materialistic framework, the whole of reality is meaningless; the concept of “higher” means nothing. Even if, within the humanist world-view, people are more complex than plants and animals, both “higher” and “lower” have no meanings. We are left with everything being sad and absurd.
Thus, the concept of progress is an illusion. Only some form of mystical jump will allow us to accept that personality comes from impersonality.90 No one has offered to explain, let alone demonstrate it to be feasible, how the impersonal plus time plus chance can give personality. We are distracted by a flourish of words – and, lo, personality has appeared out of a hat.
Imagine a universe made up of only liquids and solids, one containing no free gases. A fish is swimming in this universe. This fish, quite naturally, is conformed to its environment so that it is able to exist quite happily. Let us suppose, then, that by blind chance (as the evolutionists would have us believe) this fish developed lungs as it continued swimming in this universe without any gases. The fish would no longer be able to function and to fulfill its position as a fish. Would it then be “higher” or “lower” in its new state with lungs? Obviously it would be lower, for it would drown.
In the same way, if a person has been kicked up from the impersonal by chance, those things that make him a person – hope of purpose and significance, love, notions of morality and rationality and beauty – are ultimately unfulfillable and are thus meaningless. In such a situation, is man higher or lower? Mankind would then be the lowest creature on the scale, the least conforming to what reality is. Thus we see how hopeless is the illusion of meaning or purpose as derived from evolutionary thought.

______

Why Woody Allen’s movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS blows Perutz and Huxley comments out of the water!!!

DISCUSSING FILMS AND SPIRITUAL MATTERS
By Everette Hatcher III

“Existential subjects to me are still the only subjects worth dealing with. I don’t think that one can aim more deeply than at the so-called existential themes, the spiritual themes.” WOODY ALLEN

Evangelical Chuck Colson has observed that it used to be true that most Americans knew the Bible. Evangelists could simply call on them to repent and return. But today, most people lack understanding of biblical terms or concepts. Colson recommends that we first attempt to find common ground to engage people’s attention. That then may open a door to discuss spiritual matters.

Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS , is an excellent icebreaker concerning the need of God while making decisions in the area of personal morality. In this film, Allen attacks his own atheistic view of morality. Martin Landau plays a Jewish eye doctor named Judah Rosenthal raised by a religious father who always told him, “The eyes of God are always upon you.” However, Judah later concludes that God doesn’t exist. He has his mistress (played in the film by Anjelica Huston) murdered because she continually threatened to blow the whistle on his past questionable, probably illegal, business activities. She also attempted to break up Judah ‘s respectable marriage by going public with their two-year affair. Judah struggles with his conscience throughout the remainder of the movie. He continues to be haunted by his father’s words: “The eyes of God are always upon you.” This is a very scary phrase to a young boy, Judah observes. He often wondered how penetrating God’s eyes are.

Later in the film, Judah reflects on the conversation his religious father had with Judah ‘s unbelieving Aunt May at the dinner table many years ago:

“Come on Sol, open your eyes. Six million Jews burned to death by the Nazis, and they got away with it because might makes right,” says aunt May

Sol replies, “May, how did they get away with it?”

Judah asks, “If a man kills, then what?”

Sol responds to his son, “Then in one way or another he will be punished.”

Aunt May comments, “I say if he can do it and get away with it and he chooses not to be bothered by the ethics, then he is home free.”

Judah ‘s final conclusion was that might did make right. He observed that one day, because of this conclusion, he woke up and the cloud of guilt was gone. He was, as his aunt said, “home free.”

Woody Allen has exposed a weakness in his own humanistic view that God is not necessary as a basis for good ethics. There must be an enforcement factor in order to convince Judah not to resort to murder. Otherwise, it is fully to Judah ‘s advantage to remove this troublesome woman from his life.

The Bible tells us, “{God} has also set eternity in the hearts of men…” (Ecclesiastes 3:11 NIV). The secularist calls this an illusion, but the Bible tells us that the idea that we will survive the grave was planted in everyone’s heart by God Himself. Romans 1:19-21 tells us that God has instilled a conscience in everyone that points each of them to Him and tells them what is right and wrong (also Romans 2:14 -15).

It’s no wonder, then, that one of Allen’s fellow humanists would comment, “Certain moral truths — such as do not kill, do not steal, and do not lie — do have a special status of being not just ‘mere opinion’ but bulwarks of humanitarian action. I have no intention of saying, ‘I think Hitler was wrong.’ Hitler WAS wrong.” (Gloria Leitner, “A Perspective on Belief,” THE HUMANIST, May/June 1997, pp. 38-39)

Here Leitner is reasoning from her God-given conscience and not from humanist philosophy. It wasn’t long before she received criticism. Humanist Abigail Ann Martin responded, “Neither am I an advocate of Hitler; however, by whose criteria is he evil?” (THE HUMANIST, September/October 1997, p. 2)

The secularist can only give incomplete answers to these questions: How could you have convinced Judah not to kill? On what basis could you convince Judah it was wrong for him to murder?

As Christians, we would agree with Judah ‘s father that “The eyes of God are always upon us.” Proverbs 5:21 asserts, “For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and He ponders all his paths.” Revelation 20:12 states, “…And the dead were judged (sentenced) by what they had done (their whole way of feeling and acting, their aims and endeavors) in accordance with what was recorded in the books” (Amplified Version). The Bible is revealed truth from God. It is the basis for our morality. Judah inherited the Jewish ethical values of the Ten Commandments from his father, but, through years of life as a skeptic, his standards had been lowered. Finally, we discover that Judah ‘s secular version of morality does not resemble his father’s biblically-based morality.

Woody Allen’s CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS forces unbelievers to grapple with the logical conclusions of a purely secular morality. It opens a door for Christians to find common ground with those whom they attempt to share Christ; we all have to deal with personal morality issues. However, the secularist has no basis for asserting that Judah is wrong.

Larry King actually mentioned on his show, LARRY KING LIVE, that Chuck Colson had discussed the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS with him. Colson asked King if life was just a Darwinian struggle where the ruthless come out on top. Colson continued, “When we do wrong, is that our only choice? Either live tormented by guilt, or else kill our conscience and live like beasts?” (BREAKPOINT COMMENTARY, “Finding Common Ground,” September 14, 1993)

Later, Colson noted that discussing the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS with King presented the perfect opportunity to tell him about Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Colson believes the Lord is working on Larry King. How about your neighbors? Is there a way you can use a movie to find common ground with your lost friends and then talk to them about spiritual matters?

(Caution: CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS is rated PG-13. It does include some adult themes.)

 

 

Adrian Rogers is pictured below and Francis Schaeffer above.

Watching the film HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? in 1979 impacted my life greatly

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

 

_______

On May 15, 1994 on the 10th anniversary of the passing of Francis Schaeffer I attempted to send a letter to almost every living Nobel Prize winner and I believe  Dr. Max Perutz was probably among that group and here is a portion of that letter below:

I have enclosed a cassette tape by Adrian Rogers and it includes  a story about  Charles Darwin‘s journey from  the position of theistic evolution to agnosticism. Here are the four bridges that Adrian Rogers says evolutionists can’t cross in the CD  “Four Bridges that the Evolutionist Cannot Cross.” 1. The Origin of Life and the law of biogenesis. 2. The Fixity of the Species. 3.The Second Law of Thermodynamics. 4. The Non-Physical Properties Found in Creation.  

In the first 3 minutes of the cassette tape is the hit song “Dust in the Wind.” Below I have given you some key points  Francis Schaeffer makes about the experiment that Solomon undertakes in the book of Ecclesiastes to find satisfaction by  looking into  learning (1:16-18), laughter, ladies, luxuries,  and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20).

Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.”

Here the first 7 verses of Ecclesiastes followed by Schaeffer’s commentary on it:

The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun? A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever. The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises. The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.  

Solomon is showing a high degree of comprehension of evaporation and the results of it.  Seeing also in reality nothing changes. There is change but always in a set framework and that is cycle. You can relate this to the concepts of modern man. Ecclesiastes is the only pessimistic book in the Bible and that is because of the place where Solomon limits himself. He limits himself to the question of human life, life under the sun between birth and death and the answers this would give.

Solomon doesn’t place man outside of the cycle. Man doesn’t escape the cycle. Man is in the cycle. Birth and death and youth and old age.

There is no doubt in my mind that Solomon had the same experience in his life that I had as a younger man (at the age of 18 in 1930). I remember standing by the sea and the moon arose and it was copper and beauty. Then the moon did not look like a flat dish but a globe or a sphere since it was close to the horizon. One could feel the global shape of the earth too. Then it occurred to me that I could contemplate the interplay of the spheres and I was exalted because I thought I can look upon them with all their power, might, and size, but they could contempt nothing. Then came upon me a horror of great darkness because it suddenly occurred to me that although I could contemplate them and they could contemplate nothing yet they would continue to turn in ongoing cycles when I saw no more forever and I was crushed.

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Schaeffer noted that Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

  1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
  2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13 “I have seen something else under the sun:  The race is not to the swift
    or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant  or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.  Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times  that fall unexpectedly upon them.”)
  3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1; “Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—
    and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—  and they have no comforter.” 7:15 “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness,  and the wicked living long in their wickedness. ).
  4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).
  5. There is no ultimate lasting meaning in life. (1:2)

By the way, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes finishes with Solomon emphasizing that serving God is the only proper response of man. Solomon looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture in the final chapter of the book in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, “ Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.  For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. In 1978 I heard the song “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas when it rose to #6 on the charts. That song told me that Kerry Livgren the writer of that song and a member of Kansas had come to the same conclusion that Solomon had and that “all was meaningless UNDER THE SUN,” and looking ABOVE THE SUN was the only option.  I remember mentioning to my friends at church that we may soon see some members of Kansas become Christians because their search for the meaning of life had obviously come up empty even though they had risen from being an unknown band to the top of the music business and had all the wealth and fame that came with that.

Livgren wrote, “All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Both Kerry Livgren and Dave Hope of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and Dave Hope had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981.  Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible Church. Hope is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 53 THE BEATLES (Part E, Stg. Pepper’s and John Lennon’s search in 1967 for truth was through drugs, money, laughter, etc & similar to King Solomon’s, LOTS OF PICTURES OF JOHN AND CYNTHIA) (Feature on artist Yoko Ono)

The John Lennon and the Beatles really were on a long search for meaning and fulfillment in their lives  just like King Solomon did in the Book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon looked into learning (1:12-18, 2:12-17), laughter, ladies, luxuries, and liquor (2:1-2, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20). He fount that without God in the picture all […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

______________   George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

  The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

__________________   Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute  episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 45 Woody Allen “Reason is Dead” (Feature on artists Allora & Calzadilla )

Love and Death [Woody Allen] – What if there is no God? [PL] ___________ _______________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 44 The Book of Genesis (Featured artist is Trey McCarley )

___________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: ____________________________ Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?) Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro) Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1) Dr. Francis Schaeffer […]

__________

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS! Part 117 Sean Carroll, cosmologist and physics professor at California Institute of Technology, “Darwin to a good extent undercut “DESIGN ARGUMENT]”

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif AhmedHaroon Ahmed,  Jim Al-Khalili, Louise Antony, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BateSir Patrick BatesonSimon Blackburn, Colin Blakemore, Ned BlockPascal BoyerPatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky, Brian CoxPartha Dasgupta,  Alan Dershowitz, Frank DrakeHubert Dreyfus, John Dunn, Ken EdwardsBart Ehrman, Mark ElvinRichard Ernst, Stephan Feuchtwang, Robert FoleyDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan Greenfield, Stephen Jay GouldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan Haidt, Chris Hann,  Theodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Stephen HawkingHermann Hauser, Peter HiggsRobert HindeRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodGerard ‘t HooftCaroline HumphreyNicholas Humphrey,  Herbert Huppert,  Sir Andrew Fielding HuxleyGareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart KauffmanMasatoshi Koshiba,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George Lakoff,  Rodolfo Llinas, Seth Lloyd,  Elizabeth Loftus,  Alan Macfarlane, Colin McGinnDan McKenzie,  Mahzarin Banaji, Michael MannPeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  P.Z.Myers,   Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff, David Parkin,  Jonathan Parry, Roger Penrose,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceVS RamachandranLisa RandallLord Martin ReesColin RenfrewAlison Richard,  C.J. van Rijsbergen,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerJohn SulstonBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisMax Tegmark, Michael Tooley,  Neil deGrasse Tyson,  Martinus J. G. Veltman, Craig Venter.Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John Walker, James D. WatsonFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

Sean M. Carroll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the biologist, see Sean B. Carroll.
Sean M. Carroll
Seanmcarroll2.jpg

Sean Carroll
Born 5 October 1966 (age 50)
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Residence Los Angeles, California
Citizenship United States
Nationality American
Fields Physics, cosmology, astrophysics, general relativity
Institutions California Institute of Technology
Alma mater
Thesis Cosmological Consequences of Topological and Geometric Phenomena in Field Theories (1993)
Doctoral advisor George B. Field
Doctoral students Ignacy Sawicki, Eugene Lim, Mark Hoffman, Jennifer Chen, Heywood Tam, Lotty Ackerman, Kimberly Boddy
Known for Dark electromagnetism
Influences Albert Einstein, Ludwig Boltzmann, Richard Feynman
Notable awards Andrew Gemant Award (2014)
Spouse Jennifer Ouellette
Website
www.preposterousuniverse.com

Sean Michael Carroll (/ˈkærəl/; born 5 October 1966) is a cosmologist and physics professor specializing in dark energy and general relativity. He is a research professor in the Department of Physics at the California Institute of Technology.[1] He has been a contributor to the physics blog Cosmic Variance, and has published in scientific journals and magazines such as Nature, The New York Times, Sky & Telescope, and New Scientist.

He has appeared on the History Channel’s The Universe, Science Channel’s Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman, and Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report. Carroll is the author of Spacetime And Geometry, a graduate-level textbook in general relativity, and has also recorded lectures for The Great Courses on cosmology, the physics of time, and the Higgs boson.[2] He is also the author of three popular books: one on the arrow of time entitled From Eternity to Here, one on the Higgs boson entitled The Particle at the End of the Universe, and one on science and philosophy entitled The Big Picture: On the Origins of Life, Meaning, and the Universe Itself.

 

Career

Carroll received his PhD in astronomy and astrophysics in 1993 from Harvard University, where his advisor was George B. Field. His dissertation‘s title is “Cosmological Consequences of Topological and Geometric Phenomena in Field Theories“. He worked as a postdoctoral researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and as an assistant professor at the University of Chicago until 2006 when he was denied tenure.[3] He is now a research professor at Caltech.

His most-cited work, “Is Cosmic Speed-Up Due To New Gravitational Physics?”, was written with Vikram Duvvuri, Mark Trodden, and Michael Turner. With over 1,000 citations, it helped pioneer the study of f(R) gravity in cosmology.[4]

In 2010, Carroll was elected as a fellow of the American Physical Society, for “contributions to a wide variety of subjects in cosmology, relativity, and quantum field theory, especially ideas for cosmic acceleration, as well as contributions to undergraduate, graduate, and public science education”.[5] In 2014 he was awarded the Andrew Gemant Award, a prize given by the American Institute of Physics for “significant contributions to the cultural, artistic or humanistic dimension of physics.”[6] In 2015 he was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship.[7]

Personal life

Carroll is married to Jennifer Ouellette, a science writer and the former director of the Science & Entertainment Exchange.[8]

Research

Carroll has worked on a number of topics in theoretical cosmology, field theory, and gravitation theory. His research papers include models of, and experimental constraints on, violations of Lorentz invariance; the appearance of closed timelike curves in general relativity; varieties of topological defects in field theory; and cosmological dynamics of extra spacetime dimensions. In recent years he has written extensively on models of dark energy and its interactions with ordinary matter and dark matter, as well as modifications of general relativity in cosmology.

Carroll has also worked on the arrow of time problem. He and Jennifer Chen posit that the Big Bang is not a unique occurrence as a result of all of the matter and energy in the universe originating in a singularity at the beginning of time, but rather one of many cosmic inflation events resulting from quantum fluctuations of vacuum energy in a cold De Sitter space. Carroll and Chen claim that the universe is infinitely old, but never reaches thermodynamic equilibrium as entropy increases continuously without limit due to the decreasing matter and energy density attributable to recurrent cosmic inflation. They assert that the universe is “statistically time-symmetric” insofar as it contains equal progressions of time “both forward and backward”.[9][10][11] Some of his work has been on violations of fundamental symmetries, the physics of dark energy, modifications of general relativity, and the arrow of time. Recently he started focusing on issues at the foundations of cosmology, statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics, and complexity.

Views on religion

Carroll is an atheist. He turned down an invitation to speak at a conference sponsored by the John Templeton Foundation, on the grounds that he did not want to appear to be supporting a reconciliation between science and religion.[12] In 2004, he and Shadi Bartsch taught an undergraduate course title at the University of Chicago on the history of atheism. In 2012 he organized the workshop “Moving Naturalism Forward”, which brought together scientists and philosophers to discuss issues associated with a naturalistic worldview. His article, “Does the Universe Need God?” in The Blackwell Companion to Science and Christianity develops the claim that science no longer needs to posit a divine being to explain the existence of the universe. The article generated significant attention when it was discussed on The Huffington Post.[13] His 2016 book The big picture on the origins of life meaning and the universe itself develops the philosophy of poetic naturalism.

Carroll occasionally takes part in formal debates or discussions with theists. In 2012, Carroll teamed up with Michael Shermer to debate with Ian Hutchinson of MIT and author Dinesh D’Souza at Caltech in an event titled “The Great Debate: Has Science Refuted Religion?”[14] In 2014, Carroll debated with Christian apologist William Lane Craig as part of the Greer-Heard Forum in New Orleans. The topic for the debate was “The Existence of God in Light of Contemporary Cosmology”. Carroll received an “Emperor Has No Clothes” award at the Freedom From Religion Foundation Annual National Convention in October 2014.[15]

 

 ____

In  the second video below in the 81st clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2)

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

________

Below is the letter I wrote to Dr. Carroll with the quote from him and my response to it.

Image result for charles darwin
Darwin age 30
Image result for charles darwin
Darwin in midlife

_________

December 25, 2016

Dr. Sean M. Carroll, Pasadena ,

Dear Dr. Carroll,

I just finished reading the online addition of the book Darwin, Francis ed. 1892. Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters [abridged edition]. London: John Murray. There are several points that Charles Darwin makes in this book that were very wise, honest, logical, shocking and some that were not so wise. The Christian Philosopher Francis Schaeffer once said of Darwin’s writings, “Darwin in his autobiography and in his letters showed that all through his life he never really came to a quietness concerning the possibility that chance really explained the situation of the biological world. You will find there is much material on this [from Darwin] extended over many many years that constantly he was wrestling with this problem.”

Recently I noticed this comment by you Dr Carroll from the popular You Tube video ANOTHER 50 RENOWNED ACADEMICS SPEAKING ABOUT GOD (Part 2): 

Aristotle would tell you things like if you have an object and you want it to be in motion. You have to keep pushing it because if you stop, it stops. And Aristotle was right. It stopped if I stopped pushing it.

Physicists like to make fun of Aristotle these days but he was right in the context he was talking about.  So if you believe about fundamental stuff in the world, motion only exists when something is pushing it, then you can imagine that these kinds of arguments make sense that the fact that we see things moving in the universe despite the fact the motion requires a mover makes you believe that there must be some prime mover out there behind the whole thing. Then comes along Galileo and Newton and they saw actually if you think about it carefully the natural status for objects is uniform motion. Its just because of friction dissipation and other annoying features of the world that we see things stop

At a fundamental level things want to keep moving and unless you act upon them they will remain in uniform motion.This notion conservation of momentum completely underminded the sort of metaphysical reasoning behind the arguments for the first cause and prime-mover and things like that , and you can actually see the impact on the theological literature,  once they invented Newtonian mechanics, arguments for the existence of God changed their focus from prime-movers, first cause arguments from contingency to the argument from design. They started inventing machines and they said, “It looks like a machine and maybe there is a machinist and so forth.” Then Darwin to a good extent undercut that argument and we are still living in the aftermath of that.

These words of yours made me think about Darwin’s own words which I want to discuss with you in this letter:

They started inventing machines and they said, “It looks like a machine and maybe there is a machinist and so forth.” Then Darwin to a good extent undercut that argument and we are still living in the aftermath of that.

I thought of you recently when I read the book Charles Darwin: his life told in an autobiographical chapter, and in a selected series of his published letters because of what Darwin said on this same issue of intelligent design. I am going to quote some of Charles Darwin’s own words and then include the comments of Francis Schaeffer on those words. Earlier I had sent you  CD with two messages from Adrian Rogers and Bill Elliff concerning Darwinism. If you don’t have the CD let me know and I will be glad to send you another one.

Darwin, C. R. to Doedes, N. D.2 Apr 1873

“It is impossible to answer your question briefly; and I am not sure that I could do so, even if I wrote at some length. But I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God; but whether this is an argument of real value, I have never been able to decide…Nor can I overlook the difficulty from the immense amount of suffering through the world. I am aware that if we admit a First Cause, the mind still craves to know whence it came, and how it arose.”

Francis Schaeffer noted:

What he is saying is if you say there is a first cause, then the mind says, “Where did this come from?” I think this is a bit old fashioned, with some of the modern thinkers, this would not have carry as much weight today as it did when Darwin expressed it. Jean Paul Sartre said it as well as anyone could possibly say it. The philosophic problem is that something is there and not nothing being there. No one has the luxury of beginning with nothing. Nobody I have ever read has put forth that everything came from nothing. I have never met such a person in all my reading,or all my discussion. If you are going to begin with nothing being there, it has to be nothing nothing, and it can’t be something nothing. When someone says they believe nothing is there, in reality they have already built in something there. The only question is do you begin with an impersonal something or a personal something. All human thought is shut up to these two possibilities. Either you begin with an impersonal and then have Darwin’s own dilemma which impersonal plus chance, now he didn’t bring in the amount of time that modern man would though. Modern man has brought in huge amounts of time into the equation as though that would make a difference because I have said many times that time can’t make a qualitative difference but only a quantitative difference. The dilemma is it is either God or chance. Now you find this intriguing thing in Darwin’s own situation, he can’t understand how chance could have produced these two great factors of the universe and its form and the mannishness of man.

From Charles Darwin, Autobiography (1876), in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin, vol. 1 (London: John Murray, 1888), pp. 307 to 313.

“Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the Origin of Species, and it is since that time that it has very gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the doubt…”

Francis Schaeffer commented:

On the basis of his reason he has to say there must be an intelligent mind, someone analogous to man. You couldn’t describe the God of the Bible better. That is man is made in God’s image  and therefore, you know a great deal about God when you know something about man. What he is really saying here is that everything in my experience tells me it must be so, and my mind demands it is so. Not just these feelings he talked about earlier but his MIND demands it is so, but now how does he counter this? How does he escape this? Here is how he does it!!!

Charles Darwin went on to observe:  —can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?”

Francis Schaeffer asserted:

So he says my mind can only come to one conclusion, and that is there is a mind behind it all. However, the doubt comes because his mind has come from the lowest form of earthworm, so how can I trust my mind. But this is a joker isn’t it?  Then how can you trust his mind to support such a theory as this? He proved too much. The fact that Darwin found it necessary to take such an escape shows the tremendous weight of Romans 1, that the only escape he can make is to say how can I trust my mind when I come from the lowest animal the earthworm? Obviously think of the grandeur of his concept, I don’t think it is true, but the grandeur of his concept, so what you find is that Darwin is presenting something here that is wrong I feel, but it is not nothing. It is a tremendously grand concept that he has put forward. So he is accepting the dictates of his mind to put forth a grand concept which he later can’t accept in this basic area with his reason, but he rejects what he could accept with his reason on this escape. It really doesn’t make sense. This is a tremendous demonstration of the weakness of his own position.

Darwin also noted, “I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic.”

Francis Schaeffer remarked:

What a stupid reply and I didn’t say wicked. It just seems to me that here is 2 plus 2 equals 36 at this particular place.

Darwin, C. R. to Graham, William 3 July 1881

Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done, that the Universe is not the result of chance.* But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?

Francis Schaeffer observed:

Can you feel this man? He is in real agony. You can feel the whole of modern man in this tension with Darwin. My mind can’t accept that ultimate of chance, that the universe is a result of chance. He has said 3 or 4 times now that he can’t accept that it all happened by chance and then he will write someone else and say something different. How does he say this (about the mind of a monkey) and then put forth this grand theory? Wrong theory I feel but great just the same. Grand in the same way as when I look at many of the paintings today and I differ with their message but you must say the mark of the mannishness of man are one those paintings titanic-ally even though the message is wrong and this is the same with Darwin.  But how can he say you can’t think, you come from a monkey’s mind, and you can’t trust a monkey’s mind, and you can’t trust a monkey’s conviction, so how can you trust me? Trust me here, but not there is what Darwin is saying. In other words it is very selective. 

Now we are down to the last year of Darwin’s life.

* The Duke of Argyll (Good Words, April 1885, p. 244) has recorded a few words on this subject, spoken by my father in the last year of his life. “. . . in the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilisation of Orchids, and upon The Earthworms,and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin’s answer. He looked at me very hard and said, ‘Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,’ and he shook his head vaguely, adding, ‘it seems to go away.'”

Francis Schaeffer summarized :

And this is the great Darwin, and it makes you cry inside. This is the great Darwin and he ends as a man in total tension.

Francis Schaeffer noted that in Darwin’s 1876 Autobiography that Darwin he is going to set forth two arguments for God in this and again you will find when he comes to the end of this that he is in tremendous tension. Darwin wrote, 

At the present day the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons.Formerly I was led by feelings such as those just referred to (although I do not think that the religious sentiment was ever strongly developed in me), to the firm conviction of the existence of God and of the immortality of the soul. In my Journal I wrote that whilst standing in the midst of the grandeur of a Brazilian forest, ‘it is not possible to give an adequate idea of the higher feelings of wonder, admiration, and devotion which fill and elevate the mind.’ I well remember my conviction that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body; but now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become colour-blind.

Francis Schaeffer remarked:

Now Darwin says when I look back and when I look at nature I came to the conclusion that man can not be just a fly! But now Darwin has moved from being a younger man to an older man and he has allowed his presuppositions to enter in to block his logic. These things at the end of his life he had no intellectual answer for. To block them out in favor of his theory. Remember the letter of his that said he had lost all aesthetic senses when he had got older and he had become a clod himself. Now interesting he says just the same thing, but not in relation to the arts, namely music, pictures, etc, but to nature itself. Darwin said, “But now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions  and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become colour-blind…” So now you see that Darwin’s presuppositions have not only robbed him of the beauty of man’s creation in art, but now the universe. He can’t look at it now and see the beauty. The reason he can’t see the beauty is for a very, very , very simple reason: THE BEAUTY DRIVES HIM TO DISTRACTION. THIS IS WHERE MODERN MAN IS AND IT IS HELL. The art is hell because it reminds him of man and how great man is, and where does it fit in his system? It doesn’t. When he looks at nature and it’s beauty he is driven to the same distraction and so consequently you find what has built up inside him is a real death, not  only the beauty of the artistic but the beauty of nature. He has no answer in his logic and he is left in tension.  He dies and has become less than human because these two great things (such as any kind of art and the beauty of  nature) that would make him human  stand against his theory.

Image result for charles darwin
Darwin close to the end of his life
Image result for francis schaeffer
Francis Schaeffer pictured above

________________________

Dr. Carroll can you still look at God’s beautiful creation and say that it just appears to be the work of an intellect? If so then you like Darwin  can say, “I am like a man who has become colour-blind.”

_______________________________________

IF WE ARE LEFT WITH JUST THE MACHINE THEN WHAT IS THE FINAL CONCLUSION IF THERE WAS NO PERSONAL GOD THAT CREATED US? The CD I sent you earlier starts off with the song DUST IN THE WIND by Kerry Livgren of the group KANSAS which was a hit song in 1978 when it rose to #6 on the charts because so many people connected with the message of the song. It included these words, “All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Image result for kerry livgren dave hope 700 club
Kerry Livgren and Dave Hope on 700 Club

Image result for kerry livgren

Kerry Livgren of Kansas is on left in picture and Dave Hope is on the right

Kerry Livgren himself said that he wrote the song because he saw where man was without a personal God in the picture. Solomon pointed out in the Book of Ecclesiastes that those who believe that God doesn’t exist must accept three things. FIRST, death is the end and SECOND, chance and time are the only guiding forces in this life.  FINALLY, power reigns in this life and the scales are never balanced. The Christian can  face death and also confront the world knowing that it is not determined by chance and time alone and finally there is a judge who will balance the scales.

Both Kerry Livgren and the bass player Dave Hope of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and Dave Hope had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981 and that same  interview can be seen on You Tube today. Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible ChurchDAVE HOPE is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted.

Thank you again for your time and I know how busy you are.

Everette Hatcher, everettehatcher@gmail.com, http://www.thedailyhatch.org, cell ph 501-920-5733, Box 23416, LittleRock, AR 72221, United States

Is the Bible historically accurate? Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject and you can google them: 1. The Babylonian Chronicleof Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism)4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites6.Shishak Smiting His Captives7. Moabite Stone8Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets10. Cyrus Cylinder11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E.12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription13. The Pilate Inscription14. Caiaphas Ossuary14 B Pontius Pilate Part 214c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.

You can hear DAVE HOPE and Kerry Livgren’s stories from this youtube link:

(part 1 ten minutes)

(part 2 ten minutes)

Kansas – Dust in the Wind (Official Video)

Uploaded on Nov 7, 2009

Pre-Order Miracles Out of Nowhere now at http://www.miraclesoutofnowhere.com

About the film:
In 1973, six guys in a local band from America’s heartland began a journey that surpassed even their own wildest expectations, by achieving worldwide superstardom… watch the story unfold as the incredible story of the band KANSAS is told for the first time in the DVD Miracles Out of Nowhere.

_____________________________

Adrian Rogers on Darwinism

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 53 THE BEATLES (Part E, Stg. Pepper’s and John Lennon’s search in 1967 for truth was through drugs, money, laughter, etc & similar to King Solomon’s, LOTS OF PICTURES OF JOHN AND CYNTHIA) (Feature on artist Yoko Ono)

The John Lennon and the Beatles really were on a long search for meaning and fulfillment in their lives  just like King Solomon did in the Book of Ecclesiastes. Solomon looked into learning (1:12-18, 2:12-17), laughter, ladies, luxuries, and liquor (2:1-2, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20). He fount that without God in the picture all […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 52 THE BEATLES (Part D, There is evidence that the Beatles may have been exposed to Francis Schaeffer!!!) (Feature on artist Anna Margaret Rose Freeman )

______________   George Harrison Swears & Insults Paul and Yoko Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds- The Beatles The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 51 THE BEATLES (Part C, List of those on cover of Stg.Pepper’s ) (Feature on artist Raqib Shaw )

  The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA Uploaded on Nov 29, 2010 The Beatles in a press conference after their Return from the USA. The Beatles:   I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 50 THE BEATLES (Part B, The Psychedelic Music of the Beatles) (Feature on artist Peter Blake )

__________________   Beatles 1966 Last interview I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. In this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 49 THE BEATLES (Part A, The Meaning of Stg. Pepper’s Cover) (Feature on artist Mika Tajima)

_______________ The Beatles documentary || A Long and Winding Road || Episode 5 (This video discusses Stg. Pepper’s creation I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 48 “BLOW UP” by Michelangelo Antonioni makes Philosophic Statement (Feature on artist Nancy Holt)

_______________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: _____________________ I have included the 27 minute  episode THE AGE OF NONREASON by Francis Schaeffer. In that video Schaeffer noted,  ” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band…for a time it became the rallying cry for young people throughout the world. It expressed the essence of their lives, thoughts and their feelings.” How Should […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 47 Woody Allen and Professor Levy and the death of “Optimistic Humanism” from the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS Plus Charles Darwin’s comments too!!! (Feature on artist Rodney Graham)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 ___________________________________ Today I will answer the simple question: IS IT POSSIBLE TO BE AN OPTIMISTIC SECULAR HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR AN AFTERLIFE? This question has been around for a long time and you can go back to the 19th century and read this same […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 46 Friedrich Nietzsche (Featured artist is Thomas Schütte)

____________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: __________ Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 45 Woody Allen “Reason is Dead” (Feature on artists Allora & Calzadilla )

Love and Death [Woody Allen] – What if there is no God? [PL] ___________ _______________ How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason) #02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer 10 Worldview and Truth Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100 Francis Schaeffer […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 44 The Book of Genesis (Featured artist is Trey McCarley )

___________________________________ Francis Schaeffer pictured below: ____________________________ Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?) Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro) Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1) Dr. Francis Schaeffer […]

_____

_________

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 150 John Hospers Part F, this post includes portion of 6-2-94 letter from Hospers to me blasting Christian Evangelicalism, (Featured artist is Carrie Mae Weems)

LIBERTARIAN PARTY FOUNDER ENDORSES BUSH
AN OPEN LETTER TO ALL LIBERTARIANS | 10-24-2004 | Dr. John Hospers

Posted on 10/24/2004, 12:37:30 PM by Y2Krap

LIBERTARIAN PARTY FOUNDER ENDORSES BUSH

From Elder Statesman John Hospers * * *

AN OPEN LETTER TO LIBERTARIANS

Dear Libertarian:

As a way of getting acquainted, let me just say that I was the first presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party back in l972, and was the author of the first full-length book, Libertarianism, describing libertarianism in detail. I also wrote the Libertarian Party’s Statement of Principles at the first libertarian national convention in 1972. I still believe in those principles as strongly as ever, but this year — more than any year since the establishment of the Libertarian Party — I have major concerns about the choices open to us as voting Americans.

There is a belief that’s common among many libertarians that there is no essential difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties — between a John Kerry and a George W. Bush administration; or worse: that a Bush administration would be more undesirable. Such a notion could not be farther from the truth, or potentially more harmful to the cause of liberty.

The election of John Kerry would be, far more than is commonly realized, a catastrophe. Regardless of what he may say in current campaign speeches, his record is unmistakable: he belongs to the International Totalitarian Left in company with the Hillary and Bill Clintons, the Kofi Annans, the Ted Kennedys, and the Jesse Jacksons of the world. The Democratic Party itself has been undergoing a transformation in recent years; moderate, pro-American, and strong defense Senators such as Zell Miller, Joe Lieberman and Scoop Jackson are a dying breed. Observe how many members of the Democrat Party belong to the Progressive Caucus, indistinguishable from the Democratic Socialists of America. That caucus is the heart and soul of the contemporary Democratic Party.

Today’s Democrats have been out of majority power for so long that they are hungry for power at any price and will do anything to achieve it, including undermining the President and our troops in time of war; for them any victory for Americans in the war against terrorism is construed as a defeat for them.

The Democratic Party today is a haven for anti-Semites, racists, radical environmentalists, plundering trial lawyers, government employee unions, and numerous other self-serving elites who despise the Constitution and loath private property. It is opposed to free speech – witness the mania for political correctness and intimidation on college campuses, and Kerry’s threat to sue television stations that carry the Swift Boat ads. If given the power to do so, Democrats will use any possible means to suppress opposing viewpoints, particularly on talk radio and in the university system. They will attempt to enact “hate speech” and “hate crime” laws and re-institute the Fairness Doctrine, initiate lawsuits, and create new regulations designed to suppress freedom of speech and intimidate their political adversaries. They will call it “defending human rights.” This sort of activity may well make up the core of a Kerry administration Justice Department that will have no truck with the rule of law except as a weapon to use against opponents.

There are already numerous stories of brownshirt types committing violence against Republican campaign headquarters all over the country, and Democrat thugs harassing Republican voters at the polls. Yet not a word about it from the Kerry campaign. Expect this dangerous trend to increase dramatically with a Kerry win, ignored and tacitly accepted by the liberal-left mainstream media. This is ominous sign of worse things to come.

Kerry, who changes direction with the wind, has tried to convince us that he now disavows the anti-military sentiments that he proclaimed repeatedly in the l970s. But in fact he will weaken our military establishment and devastate American security by placing more value on the United Nations than on the United States: for example he favors the Kyoto Treaty and the International Criminal Court, and opposed the withdrawal of the U.S. from the ABM Treaty. He has been quoted as saying that it is honorable for those in the U.S. military to die under the flag of the U.N. but not that of the U.S. Presumably he and a small cadre of bureaucrats should rule the world, via the U.N. or some other world body which will make all decisions for the whole world concerning private property, the use of our military, gun ownership, taxation, and environmental policy (to name a few). In his thirty-year career he has demonstrated utter contempt for America, national security, constitutional republicanism, democracy, private property, and free markets.

His wife’s foundations have funneled millions of dollars into far-left organizations that are virulently hostile to America and libertarian principles. Not only would these foundations continue to lack transparency to the American people, they would be given enormous vigor in a Kerry administration.

Already plans are afoot by the Kerry campaign to steal the coming election via a legal coup, e.g. to claim victory on election night no matter what the vote differential is, and initiate lawsuits anywhere and everywhere they feel it works to their advantage, thus making a mockery of our election process, throwing the entire process into chaos — possibly for months — and significantly weakening our ability to conduct foreign policy and protect ourselves domestically. Let me repeat: we are facing the very real possibility of a political coup occurring in America. Al Gore very nearly got away with one in 2000. Do not underestimate what Kerry and his ilk are going to attempt to do to America.

George Bush has been criticized for many things – and in many cases with justification: on campaign finance reform (a suppression of the First Amendment), on vast new domestic spending, on education, and on failing to protect the borders. No self-respecting libertarian or conservative would fail to be deeply appalled by these. His great virtue, however, is that he has stood up — knowingly at grave risk to his political viability — to terrorism when his predecessors, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Clinton did not. On many occasions during their administrations terrorists attacked American lives and property. Clinton did nothing, or engaged in a feckless retaliation such as bombing an aspirin factory in the Sudan (based on faulty intelligence, to boot). Then shortly after Bush became president he was hit with “the big one:” 9/11. It was clear to him that terrorism was more than a series of criminal acts: it was a war declared upon U.S. and indeed to the entire civilized world long before his administration. He decided that action had to be taken to protect us against future 9/11s involving weapons of mass destruction, including “suitcase” nuclear devices.

Indeed, today it is Islamic fundamentalism that increasingly threatens the world just as Nazis fascism and Soviet communism did in previous decades. The Islamo-fascists would be happy to eliminate all non-Muslims without a tinge of regret. Many Americans still indulge in wishful thinking on this issue, viewing militant Islam as a kind of nuisance, which can be handled without great inconvenience in much the same way as one swats flies, rather than as hordes of genocidal religious fanatics dedicated to our destruction.

The president has been berated for taking even minimal steps to deal with the dangers of this war (the allegations made against the Patriot Act seem to me based more on hysteria and political opportunism than on reality). But Bush, like Churchill, has stood steadfast in the face of it, and in spite of the most virulent hate and disinformation campaign that any American president has had to endure. Afghanistan is no longer a safe haven for terrorists. Saddam’s regime is no longer a major player in the worldwide terror network. Libya has relinquished their weapons of terror. The Pakistani black market in weapons of mass destruction has been eliminated. Arafat is rotting in Ramallah. Terrorist cells all over the world have been disrupted, and thousands of terrorists killed. The result: Americans are orders of magnitude safer.

National defense is always expensive, and Bush has been widely excoriated for these expenditures. But as Ayn Rand memorably said at a party I attended in l962, in response to complaints that “taxes are too high” (then 20%), “Pay 80% if you need it for defense.” It is not the amount but the purpose served that decides what is “too much.” And the purpose here is the continuation of civilized life on earth in the face of vastly increased threats to its existence.

Bush cut income tax rates for the first time in fifteen years. These cuts got us moving out of the recession he inherited, and we are all economically much better off because of them. 1.9 million new jobs have been added to the economy since August 2003. Bush has other projects in the wind for which libertarians have not given him credit. For example:

(l) A total revision of our tax code. We will have a debate concerning whether this is best done via a flat tax or a sales tax. If such a change were to occur, it would be a gigantic step in the direction of liberty and prosperity. No such change will occur with Kerry.

(2) A market-based reform of Social Security. This reform, alone, could bring future budget expenditures down so significantly that it would make his current expenditures seem like pocket change. Kerry has already repudiated any such change in social security laws.

The American electorate is not yet psychologically prepared for a completely libertarian society. A transition to such a society takes time and effort, and involves altering the mind-set of most Americans, who labor under a plethora of economic fallacies and political misconceptions. It will involve a near-total restructuring of the educational system, which today serves the liberal-left education bureaucracy and Democratic Party, not the student or parent. It will require a merciless and continuous expose of the bias in the mainstream media (the Internet, blogs, and talk radio have been extremely successful in this regard over the past few years). And it will require understanding the influence and importance of the Teresa Kerry-like Foundations who work in the shadows to undermine our constitutional system of checks and balances.

Most of all, it will require the American people — including many libertarians – to realize the overwhelming dangerousness of the American Left – a Fifth Column comprised of the elements mentioned above, dedicated to achieving their goal of a totally internationally dominated America, and a true world-wide Fascism.

Thus far their long-term plans have been quite successful. A Kerry presidency will fully open their pipeline to infusions of taxpayer-funded cash and political pull. At least a continued Bush presidency would help to stem this tide, and along the way it might well succeed in preserving Western civilization against the fanatic Islamo-fascists who have the will, and may shortly have the weapons capability, to bring it to an end.

When the stakes are not high it is sometimes acceptable, even desirable, to vote for a ‘minor party’ candidate who cannot possibly win, just to “get the word out” and to promote the ideals for which that candidate stands. But when the stakes are high, as they are in this election, it becomes imperative that one should choose, not the candidate one considers philosophically ideal, but the best one available who has the most favorable chance of winning. The forthcoming election will determine whether it is the Republicans or the Democrats that win the presidency. That is an undeniable reality. If the election is as close as it was in 2000, libertarian voters may make the difference as to who wins in various critical “Battle Ground” states and therefore the presidency itself. That is the situation in which we find ourselves in 2004. And that is why I believe voting for George W. Bush is the most libertarian thing we can do.

We stand today at an important electoral crossroads for the future of liberty, and as libertarians our first priority is to promote liberty and free markets, which is not necessarily the same as to promote the Libertarian Party. This time, if we vote libertarian, we may win a tiny rhetorical battle, but lose the larger war.

John Hospers

Los Angeles, CA

The Sovietization of America: John Hospers

 

I sent a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers on Evolution to John Hospers in May of 1994 which was the 10th anniversary of Francis Schaeffer’s passing and I promptly received a typed two page response from Dr. John Hospers. Dr. Hospers had both read my letter and all the inserts plus listened to the whole sermon and had some very angry responses. If you would like to hear the sermon from Adrian Rogers and read the transcript then refer to my earlier post at this link.  Over the last few weeks I have posted  portions of Dr. Hospers’ letter and portions of the cassette tape that he listened to back in 1994, but today I want  to look at some other comments made on that cassette tape that John Hospers listened to and I will also post a few comments that Dr. Hospers made in that 2 page letter.

 

Image result for john hospers

 

Here is a portion of Hospers’ June 2, 1994 letter to me: 

Why the holier-than-thou-attitude? “Don’t you think it is time you stopped and thought about spiritual things?” you ask. I have spent most of my life thinking about NOTHING ELSE.

_______

Image result for bill elliff summit church

Bill Elliff, the pastor of Summitt Church in North Little Rock, was my pastor during the 1990’s at First Baptist Church in Little Rock. On the cassette tape that I sent to Dr. John Hospers there is a portion of a sermon that Dr. Elliff did on Romans 1 that I wanted to share:

Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural,27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips,30 slanderers, [k]haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

________________

God has revealed himself to you…Most men reject the light that God gives them and with that knowing rejection come FOOLISH THINKING and FATAL CHOICES.

I read an illustration last Sunday night so profound to me that I want to read it again in closing. CHARLES DARWIN who has so dramatically affected the thinking of the world in a tragic way made this statement:

At the present day the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons….Formerly I was led by feelings such as those just referred to… to the firm conviction of the existence of God, and of the immortality of the soul. In my Journal I wrote that whilst standing in the midst of the grandeur of a Brazilian forest, “it is not possible to give an adequate idea of the higher feelings of wonder, admiration, and devotion, which fill and elevate the mind.” I well remember my conviction that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body. But now the grandest scenes would not cause any such convictions and feelings to rise in my mind. It may be truly said that I am like a man who has become color-blind,

For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.  Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for the glory of man’s creation. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature more than the creator. And they exchanged the natural glorious plans that God has for man for the Godless, immoral, perverse plans of man. It happens to every man who ultimately rejects God. WHAT ABOUT YOU? 

Image result for charles darwin

XXXXXXX

 

How can I know the Bible is the Word of God? by Adrian Rogers

________________________

 

____

Is the Bible historically accurate? Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject: 1. The Babylonian Chronicleof Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism)4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites6.Shishak Smiting His Captives7. Moabite Stone8Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets10. Cyrus Cylinder11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E.12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription13. The Pilate Inscription14. Caiaphas Ossuary14 B Pontius Pilate Part 214c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.

 The Bible and Archaeology – Is the Bible from God? (Kyle Butt)

______________________

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know the Bible is True,” “The Final Judgement,” “Who is Jesus?” and the message by Bill Elliff, “How to get a pure heart.”  I would also send them printed material from the works of Francis Schaeffer and a personal apologetic letter from me addressing some of the issues in their work. My second cassette tape that I sent to both Antony Flew and George Wald was Adrian Rogers’ sermon on evolution and here below you can watch that very sermon on You Tube.   Carl Sagan also took time to correspond with me about a year before he died. 

(Francis Schaeffer pictured below)

Image result for francis schaeffer

Adrian Rogers pictured below

I have posted on Adrian Rogers’ messages on Evolution before but here is a complete message on it.

Evolution: Fact of Fiction? By Adrian Rogers

__

__________

Featured artist is Carrie Mae Weems

 

at the 15 min mark she talks about Tolstoy and the story Anna Karenina and at the 17 min mark she talked about Nina Simone, Glen Campbell and Frank Sinatra doing the song MY WAY and she would listen to that song over and over. “Music has saved me life” and talked about Marcel Duchamp at 18 min mark and then talked about  Martin Puryear’s Jacobs ladder

__

Marcel Duchamp (photographed by Man Ray, 1890–1976) from 1921

FRESH TALK: Carrie Mae Weems—Can an artist inspire social change?

Carrie Mae Weems: An Artist Reflects

Left of Black with Carrie Mae Weems and Thabiti Lewis

Carrie Mae Weems: “The Kitchen Table Series” | “Exclusive” | Art21

Pablo Picasso, Rene Magritte and new acquisitions

Posted By on Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:47 AM

click to enlargePablo Picasso's "Seated Woman in Chemise"

  • Pablo Picasso’s “Seated Woman in Chemise”

Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art is overflowing with news. First up: Pablo Picasso’s “Seated Woman in Chemise (1923)” is coming to the museum from the Tate Modern for a three-month loan starting in late April.

Also being loaned: Philip Haas’ “The Four Seasons” sculptures from Sonnabend Gallery, which will go on exhibit Friday, and Rene Magritte’s “L’Anniversaire,” on loan from the Art Gallery of Ontario, will come in the fall. The Picasso and Magritte will be part of a reinstallation of works from Crystal Bridges’ collection of Modernist paintings.

The Arkansas Times Art Bus is making a trip in July; “Seated Woman” should add even more interest to the other show on the menu, “American Made: Treasures from the American Folk Art Museum.”

click to enlargePhilip Haas' "Four Seasons" at the Nelson-Atkins Museum in Kansas City.

  • Philip Haas’ “Four Seasons” at the Nelson-Atkins Museum in Kansas City.

Haas’ “Four Seasons,” inspired by the vegetable heads of the 16h century artist Giuseppe Arcimboldi, will be installed along the Orchard Trail and in the museum courtyard. The heads of the “Four Seasons” are 15 feet tall and constructed of fiberglass. Smaller maquettes of the sculptures will be installed in the museum’s Bridge Gallery. Haas, who is a screenwriter and filmmaker, will give a talk at Crystal Bridges 1-2 p.m. this Friday, April 29.

From the news release on Haas:

Philip Haas, in marrying sculpture, painting, film and architecture, has created a contemporary visual vocabulary all his own. He describes his process as “sculpting by thinking.” Haas’s twenty-first-century interpretation translates the historic paintings into three-dimensional form and connects to nature’s annual cycle of death and renewal. Each bust-length sculpture showcases a medley of vegetation associated with a specific time of year. In Winter, for example, the skin of the subject is represented through oversized forms of fiberglass bark and hair by gnarled tree limbs and ivy. Spring features a riot of flower forms in bright hues arranged to represent a human portrait. The Summer head is adorned with seasonal foliage, while Autumn includes its own cornucopia of fruits and vegetables.

click to enlargeCarrie Mae Weems' "Untitled (Woman and daughter with children)" - CRYSTAL BRIDGES MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART, BENTONVILLE, ARKANSAS

  • CRYSTAL BRIDGES MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART, BENTONVILLE, ARKANSAS
  • Carrie Mae Weems’ “Untitled (Woman and daughter with children)”

Next up: Five new acquisitions will be part of the “Black Unity” exhibition opening next week, May 4. On exhibit will be 13 works made by eight African American artists in photography, sculpture, painting and tapestry.

The works owned by Crystal Bridges include the famous “A Warm Summer Evening in 1863 (2008)” by Kara Walker; “Liberty Bros. Permanent Daily Circus — Army of Clowns (1995)” by Michael Ray Charles; the sculpture “Black Unity” by Elizabeth Catlett; and four photographs by Carrie Mae Weems.

The show runs through Sept. 5.

 “With the increased diversification of our collections, it is exciting to have the opportunity to showcase new acquisitions in an installation that specifically addresses the black experience in this country,” says Alejo Benedetti, Crystal Bridges curator for Black Unity. “This show encourages conversations about race. The unique voices of the artists unite visitors across a shared American identity—in this way black unity is inherently American unity.”

 

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 135 H. J. Blackham Part C Featured artist is Richard Anuszkiewicz

________     H. J. Blackham H. J. Blackham, (31 March 1903 – 23 January 2009), was a leading and widely respected British humanist for most of his life. As a young man he worked in farming and as a teacher. He found his niche as a leader in the Ethical Union, which he steadfastly […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 134 H.J.Blackham Part B (Featured artist is Richard M. Loving)

H.J.Blackham pictured below: I had to pleasure of corresponding with Paul Kurtz in the 1990’s and he like H. J. Blackham firmly believed that religion was needed to have a basis for morals. At H. J. Blackham’s funeral in 2009 these words were read from Paul Kurtz: Paul Kurtz Founder and Chair, Prometheus Books and the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 133 A Portion of my 1994 letter to H. J. Blackham on the 10th Anniversary of Francis Schaeffer’s passing (Featured artist is Billy Al Bengston )

H. J. Blackham pictured below:   On May 15, 1994 on the 10th anniversary of the passing of Francis Schaeffer I sent a letter to H.J. Blackham and here is a portion of that letter below: I have enclosed a cassette tape by Adrian Rogers and it includes  a story about  Charles Darwin‘s journey from […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 132 Part D Ellsworth Kelly (Featured artist is Ronald Davis )

  I featured the artwork of Ellsworth Kelly on my blog both on November 23, 2015 and December 17, 2015. Also I mailed him a letter on November 23, 2015, but I never heard back from him.  Unfortunately he died on December 27, 2015 at the age of 92. Who were the artists who influenced […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 131 Part C Ellsworth Kelly (Featured artist is Janet Fish )

__ I featured the artwork of Ellsworth Kelly on my blog both on November 23, 2015 and December 17, 2015. Also I mailed him a letter on November 23, 2015, but I never heard back from him.  Unfortunately he died on December 27, 2015 at the age of 92.       Who were the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 130 Part B Ellsworth Kelly (Featured artist is Art Green )

Andy, Ellsworth Kelly, Richard Koshalek and unidentified guest, 1980s I featured the artwork of Ellsworth Kelly on my blog both on November 23, 2015 and December 17, 2015. Also I mailed him a letter on November 23, 2015, but I never heard back from him.  Unfortunately he died on December 27, 2015 at the age […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 129 Part A Ellsworth Kelly (Featured artist is Sherrie Levine )

How Should We Then Live – Episode 8 – The Age of Fragmentation   I featured the artwork of Ellsworth Kelly on my blog both on November 23, 2015 and December 17, 2015. Also I mailed him a letter on November 23, 2015, but I never heard back from him.  Unfortunately he died on December […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 128 Will Provine, Determinism, Part F (Featured artist is Pierre Soulages )

Today I am bringing this series on William Provine to an end.  Will Provine’s work was cited by  Francis Schaeffer  in his book WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? I noted: I was sad to learn of Dr. Provine’s death. William Ball “Will” Provine (February 19, 1942 – September 1, 2015) He grew up an […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 127 Will Provine, Killer of the myth of Optimistic Humanism Part E (Featured artist is Jim Dine )

___ Setting the record straight was Will Provine’s widow Gail when she stated, “[Will] did not believe in an ULTIMATE meaning in life (i.e. God’s plan), but he did believe in proximate meaning (i.e. relationships with people — friendship and especially LOVE🙂 ). So one’s existence is ultimately senseless and useless, but certainly not to those […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 126 Will Provine, Killer of the myth of Optimistic Humanism Part D (Featured artists are Elena and Olivia Ceballos )

I was sad when I learned of Will Provine’s death. He was a very engaging speaker on the subject of Darwinism and I think he correctly realized what the full ramifications are when accepting evolution. This is the fourth post I have done on Dr. Provine and the previous ones are these links, 1st, 2nd […]

_______________

RESPONDING TO HARRY KROTO’S BRILLIANT RENOWNED ACADEMICS! Part 116 Sir Raymond Firth, Professor of Anthropology at London School of Economics, “Religion [is] an essentially human product” (Includes a portion of my 5-15-94 letter to Dr. Firth)

_________

On November 21, 2014 I received a letter from Nobel Laureate Harry Kroto and it said:

…Please click on this URL http://vimeo.com/26991975

and you will hear what far smarter people than I have to say on this matter. I agree with them.

Harry Kroto

 

I have attempted to respond to all of Dr. Kroto’s friends arguments and I have posted my responses one per week for over a year now. Here are some of my earlier posts:

Arif AhmedHaroon Ahmed,  Jim Al-Khalili, Louise Antony, Sir David AttenboroughMark Balaguer, Horace Barlow, Michael BateSir Patrick BatesonSimon Blackburn, Colin Blakemore, Ned BlockPascal BoyerPatricia ChurchlandAaron CiechanoverNoam Chomsky, Brian CoxPartha Dasgupta,  Alan Dershowitz, Frank DrakeHubert Dreyfus, John Dunn, Ken EdwardsBart Ehrman, Mark ElvinRichard Ernst, Stephan Feuchtwang, Robert FoleyDavid Friend,  Riccardo GiacconiIvar Giaever , Roy GlauberRebecca GoldsteinDavid J. Gross,  Brian Greene, Susan Greenfield, Stephen Jay GouldStephen F Gudeman,  Alan Guth, Jonathan Haidt, Chris Hann,  Theodor W. Hänsch, Brian Harrison,  Stephen HawkingHermann Hauser, Peter HiggsRobert HindeRoald Hoffmann,  Bruce HoodGerard ‘t HooftCaroline HumphreyNicholas Humphrey,  Herbert Huppert,  Sir Andrew Fielding HuxleyGareth Stedman Jones, Steve JonesShelly KaganMichio Kaku,  Stuart KauffmanMasatoshi Koshiba,  Lawrence KraussHarry Kroto, George Lakoff,  Rodolfo Llinas, Seth Lloyd,  Elizabeth Loftus,  Alan Macfarlane, Colin McGinnDan McKenzie,  Mahzarin Banaji, Michael MannPeter MillicanMarvin MinskyLeonard Mlodinow,  P.Z.Myers,   Yujin NagasawaAlva NoeDouglas Osheroff, David Parkin,  Jonathan Parry, Roger Penrose,  Saul PerlmutterHerman Philipse,  Carolyn PorcoRobert M. PriceVS RamachandranLisa RandallLord Martin ReesColin RenfrewAlison Richard,  C.J. van Rijsbergen,  Oliver Sacks, John SearleMarcus du SautoySimon SchafferJ. L. Schellenberg,   Lee Silver Peter Singer,  Walter Sinnott-ArmstrongRonald de Sousa, Victor StengerJohn SulstonBarry Supple,   Leonard Susskind, Raymond TallisMax Tegmark, Michael Tooley,  Neil deGrasse Tyson,  Martinus J. G. Veltman, Craig Venter.Alexander Vilenkin, Sir John Walker, James D. WatsonFrank WilczekSteven Weinberg, and  Lewis Wolpert,

Raymond Firth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sir Raymond Firth
Professor Sir Raymond Firth, c1965.jpg
Born 25 March 1901
Auckland,
New Zealand
Died 22 February 2002 (aged 100)
London,
England
Fields Ethnologist
Academic advisors Bronisław Malinowski
Doctoral students Edmund Leach

Sir Raymond William Firth, CNZM, FBA (25 March 1901 – 22 February 2002) was an ethnologist from New Zealand. As a result of Firth’s ethnographic work, actual behaviour of societies (social organization) is separated from the idealized rules of behaviour within the particular society (social structure). He was a long serving Professor of Anthropology at London School of Economics, and is considered to have singlehandedly created a form of British economic anthropology.[1]

Early life and academic career[edit]

Firth was born to Wesley and Marie Firth in Auckland, New Zealand, in 1901. He was educated at Auckland Grammar School, and then at Auckland University College, where he graduated in economics in 1921.[2] He took his MA there in 1922, and a diploma in social science in 1923.[3] In 1924 he began his doctoral research at the London School of Economics. Originally intending to complete a thesis in economics, a chance meeting with the eminent social anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski led to him to alter his field of study to ‘blending economic and anthropological theory with Pacific ethnography’.[2] It was possibly during this period in England that he worked as research assistant to Sir James G Frazer, author of The Golden Bough.[4] Firth’s doctoral thesis was published in 1929 as Primitive Economics of the New Zealand Māori.

After receiving his PhD in 1927 Firth returned to the southern hemisphere to take up a position at the University of Sydney, although he did not start teaching immediately as a research opportunity presented itself. In 1928 he first visited Tikopia, the southernmost of the Solomon Islands, to study the untouched Polynesian society there, resistant to outside influences and still with its pagan religion and undeveloped economy.[2] This was the beginning of a long relationship with the 1200 people of the remote four mile long island, and resulted in ten books and numerous articles written over many years. The first of these, We the Tikopia: A Sociological Study of Kinship in Primitive Polynesia was published in 1936 and seventy years on is still used as a basis for many university courses about Oceania.[5]

In 1930 he started teaching at the University of Sydney. On the departure for Chicago of Alfred Radcliffe-Brown, Firth succeeded him as acting Professor. He also took over from Radcliffe-Brown as acting editor of the journal Oceania, and as acting director of the Anthropology Research Committee of the Australian National Research Committee.

After 18 months he returned to the London School of Economics in 1933 to take up a lectureship, and was appointed Reader in 1935. Together with his wife Rosemary Firth, also to become a distinguished anthropologist, he undertook fieldwork in Kelantan and Terengganu in Malaya in 1939-1940.[6] During the Second World War Firth worked for British naval intelligence, primarily writing and editing the four volumes of the Naval Intelligence Division Geographical Handbook Series that concerned the Pacific Islands.[7] During this period Firth was based in Cambridge, where the LSE had its wartime home.

Firth succeeded Malinowski as Professor of Social Anthropology at LSE in 1944, and he remained at the School for the next 24 years.[2] In the late 1940s he was a member of the Academic Advisory Committee of the then-fledgling Australian National University, along with Sir Howard Florey (co-developer of medicinal penicillin), Sir Mark Oliphant (a nuclear physicist who worked on the Manhattan Project), and Sir Keith Hancock (Chichele Professor of Economic History at Oxford). Firth was particularly focused on the creation of the university’s School of Pacific Studies.[8]

He returned to Tikopia on research visits several times, although as travel and fieldwork requirements became more burdensome he focused on family and kinship relationships in working- and middle-class London.[6]Firth left LSE in 1968, when he took up a year’s appointment as Professor of Pacific Anthropology at the University of Hawaiʻi. There followed visiting professorships at British Columbia (1969), Cornell (1970), Chicago (1970-1), the Graduate School of the City University of New York (1971) and UC Davis (1974). The second festschrift published in his honour described him as ‘perhaps the greatest living teacher of anthropology today’.[3]

After retiring from teaching work, Firth continued with his research interests, and right up until his hundredth year he was producing articles. He died in London a few weeks before his 101st birthday: his father had lived to 104.

Personal life[edit]

Firth married Rosemary Firth (née Upcott) in 1936 and she died in 2001; they had one son, Hugh, who was born in 1946. He was raised a Methodist then later became a humanist and an atheist, a decision influenced by his anthropological studies.[9][10] He was one of the signers of the Humanist Manifesto.[11]

  •  Sir Raymond Firth)

Papers[edit]

Sir Raymond Firth’s papers are held at the London School of Economics – including his photographic collection

 ____

In  the second video below in the 54th clip in this series are his words and  my response is below them. 

50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 1)

Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 2)

A Further 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God (Part 3)

________

Sir Raymond Firth:

I think that religion has always been one of my interests, looking at it as an essentially human product…

I would like to give 3 responses to the above assertion made by Dr. Firth.

FIRST, Romans 1 points that every person has a God-given conscience instead of them that tells them that God exists. I go into this further in a June 17, 2014 letter I wrote to Harry Kroto (which is below). The interesting factor is that this can be tested by a lie-detector.

SECOND, let me recommend a book  by Sean McDowell and Jonathan Marrow, called Is God Just a Human Invention? And Seventeen Other Questions Raised by the New Atheists. I have included a review of it later in this post.

THIRD, Solomon showed very clearly in the Book of Ecclesiastes that without God in the picture when one looks at life UNDER THE SUN the only conclusions one can reach is that life is meaningless and there is no satisfaction anywhere. Firth’s close friend H.J.Blackham who founded the BRITISH HUMANIST ASSOCIATION where Firth belonged as a member has eloquently stated:

On humanist assumptions, life leads to nothing, and every pretense that it does not is a deceit. If there is a bridge over a gorge which spans only half the distance and ends in mid-air, and if the bridge is crowded with human beings pressing on, one after the other they fall into the abyss. The bridge leads nowhere, and those who are pressing forward to cross it are going nowhere….It does not matter where they think they are going, what preparations for the journey they may have made, how much they may be enjoying it all. The objection merely points out objectively that such a situation is a model of futility“( H. J. Blackham, et al., Objections to Humanism (Riverside, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1967).

Harold John Blackham (31 March 1903 – 23 January 2009)

Image result for h.j. blackham british humanist

___

In fact, I sent Dr. Firth I sheet of quotes on May 15, 1994 that included that quote above from his friend H.J. Blackham but I never received a return letter from him. I have included a portion of that letter that I sent to Dr. Firth at the end of this post. Here is another section from that letter:

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Schaeffer noted that Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

  1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
  2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13 “I have seen something else under the sun:  The race is not to the swift
    or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant  or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.  Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times  that fall unexpectedly upon them.”)
  3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1; “Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—
    and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—  and they have no comforter.” 7:15 “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness,  and the wicked living long in their wickedness. ).
  4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).
  5. There is no ultimate lasting meaning in life. (1:2)

By the way, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes finishes with Solomon emphasizing that serving God is the only proper response of man. Solomon looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture in the final chapter of the book in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, “ Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.  For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.”

______________________

Harry Kroto, Dept of Chemistry and Biochemistry, c/o Florida State

June 17, 2014

Dear Dr. Kroto,

I noticed that you are on the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) and that prompted me to send this material to you today.

A couple of months ago I mailed you a letter that contained correspondence I had with Antony Flew and Carl Sagan and I also included some of the material I had sent them from Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer. Did you have a chance to listen to the IS THE BIBLE TRUE? CD yet? I also wanted to let know some more about about Francis Schaeffer. Ronald Reagan said of Francis Schaeffer, “He will long be remembered as one of the great Christian thinkers of our century, with a childlike faith and a profound compassion toward others. It can rarely be said of an individual that his life touched many others and affected them for the better; it will be said of Francis Schaeffer that his life touched millions of souls and brought them to the truth of their creator.”

Thirty years ago the christian philosopher and author Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984) died and on the 10th anniversary of his passing in 1994 I wrote a number of the top evolutionists, humanists and atheistic scholars in the world and sent them a story about Francis Schaeffer in 1930 when he left agnosticism and embraced Christianity. I also sent them  a cassette tape with the title “Four intellectual bridges evolutionists can’t cross” by Adrian Rogers (1931-2005) and some of the top  scholars who corresponded with me since that time include Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-).

Corliss Lamont and Herbert A. Tonne pictured above. 

The truth is that I am an evangelical Christian and I have enjoyed developing relationships with skeptics and humanists over the years. Back in 1996 I took my two sons who were 8  and 10 yrs old back then to New York, Washington, Philadelphia, Delaware, and New Jersey and we had dinner one night with Herbert A. Tonne, who was one of the signers of the Humanist Manifesto II. The Late Professor John George who has written books for Prometheus Press was my good friend during the last 10 years of his life. (I still miss him today.) We often ate together and were constantly talking on the phone and writing letters to one another.

It is a funny story how I met Dr. George. As an evangelical Christian and a member of the Christian Coalition, I felt obliged to expose a misquote of John Adams’ I found in an article entitled “America’s Unchristian Beginnings” by the self-avowed atheist Dr. Steven Morris. However, what happened next changed my focus to the use of misquotes, unconfirmed quotes, and misleading attributions by the religious right.

In the process of attempting to correct Morris, I was guilty of using several misquotes myself. Professor John George of the University of Central Oklahoma political science department and coauthor (with Paul Boller Jr.) of the book THEY NEVER SAID IT! set me straight. George pointed out that George Washington never said, “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible. I had cited page 18 of the 1927 edition of HALLEY’S BIBLE HANDBOOK. This quote was probably generated by a similar statement that appears in A LIFE OF WASHINGTON by James Paulding. Sadly, no one has been able to verify any of the quotes in Paulding’s book since no footnotes were offered.

Paul F. Boller Jr.: 1916–2014

After reading THEY NEVER SAID IT! I had a better understanding of how widespread the problem of misquotes is. Furthermore, I discovered that many of these had been used by the leaders of the religious right. I decided to confront some individuals concerning their misquotes. WallBuilders, the publisher of David Barton’s THE MYTH OF SEPARATION, responded by providing me with their “unconfirmed  quote” list which contained a dozen quotes widely used by the religious right.

Sadly some of the top leaders of my own religious right have failed to take my encouragement to stop using these quotes and they have either claimed that their critics were biased skeptics who find the truth offensive or they defended their own method of research and claimed the secondary sources were adequate.

I have enclosed that same CD by Adrian Rogers that I sent 20 years ago although the second half does include a story about  Charles Darwin‘s journey from  the position of theistic evolution to agnosticism. Here are the four bridges that Adrian Rogers says evolutionists can’t cross in the CD  “Four Bridges that the Evolutionist Cannot Cross.” 1. The Origin of Life and the law of biogenesis. 2. The Fixity of the Species. 3.The Second Law of Thermodynamics. 4. The Non-Physical Properties Found in Creation.  

In the first 3 minutes of the CD is the hit song “Dust in the Wind.” In the letter 20 years ago I gave some of the key points Francis Schaeffer makes about the experiment that Solomon undertakes in the book of Ecclesiastes to find satisfaction by  looking into  learning (1:16-18), laughter, ladies, luxuries,  and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and labor (2:4-6, 18-20).

I later learned this book of Ecclesiastes was Richard Dawkins’ favorite book in the Bible. Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.” No wonder Ecclesiastes is Richard Dawkins’ favorite book of the Bible! 

Here the first 7 verses of Ecclesiastes followed by Schaeffer’s commentary on it:

The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun? A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever. The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises. The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.  

Solomon is showing a high degree of comprehension of evaporation and the results of it. (E.O.Wilson has marveled at Solomon’s scientific knowledge of ants that was only discovered in the 1800’s.) Seeing also in reality nothing changes. There is change but always in a set framework and that is cycle. You can relate this to the concepts of modern man. Ecclesiastes is the only pessimistic book in the Bible and that is because of the place where Solomon limits himself. He limits himself to the question of human life, life under the sun between birth and death and the answers this would give.

(Harvard’s E.O. Wilson below)

Image result for e.o.wilson

Solomon doesn’t place man outside of the cycle. Man doesn’t escape the cycle. Man is in the cycle. Birth and death and youth and old age.

(Francis Schaeffer pictured above)

There is no doubt in my mind that Solomon had the same experience in his life that I had as a younger man (at the age of 18 in 1930). I remember standing by the sea and the moon arose and it was copper and beauty. Then the moon did not look like a flat dish but a globe or a sphere since it was close to the horizon. One could feel the global shape of the earth too. Then it occurred to me that I could contemplate the interplay of the spheres and I was exalted because I thought I can look upon them with all their power, might, and size, but they could contempt nothing. Then came upon me a horror of great darkness because it suddenly occurred to me that although I could contemplate them and they could contemplate nothing yet they would continue to turn in ongoing cycles when I saw no more forever and I was crushed.

You are an atheist and you have a naturalistic materialistic worldview, and this short book of Ecclesiastes should interest you because the wisest man who ever lived in the position of King of Israel came to THREE CONCLUSIONS that will affect you.

FIRST, chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13)

These two verses below  take the 3 elements mentioned in a naturalistic materialistic worldview (time, chance and matter) and so that is all the unbeliever can find “under the sun” without God in the picture. You will notice that these are the three elements that evolutionists point to also.

Ecclesiastes 9:11-12 is following: I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all. Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times that fall unexpectedly upon them.

SECOND, Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)

THIRD, Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1, 8:15)

Ecclesiastes 4:1-2: “Next I turned my attention to all the outrageous violence that takes place on this planet—the tears of the victims, no one to comfort them; the iron grip of oppressors, no one to rescue the victims from them.” Ecclesiastes 8:14; “ Here’s something that happens all the time and makes no sense at all: Good people get what’s coming to the wicked, and bad people get what’s coming to the good. I tell you, this makes no sense. It’s smoke.”

Solomon had all the resources in the world and he found himself searching for meaning in life and trying to come up with answers concerning the afterlife. However, it seems every door he tries to open is locked. Today men try to find satisfaction in learning, liquor, ladies, luxuries, laughter, and labor and that is exactly what Solomon tried to do too.  None of those were able to “fill the God-sized vacuum in his heart” (quote from famous mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal). You have to wait to the last chapter in Ecclesiastes to find what Solomon’s final conclusion is.

In 1978 I heard the song “Dust in the Wind” by Kansas when it rose to #6 on the charts. That song told me that Kerry Livgren the writer of that song and a member of Kansas had come to the same conclusion that Solomon had. I remember mentioning to my friends at church that we may soon see some members of Kansas become Christians because their search for the meaning of life had obviously come up empty even though they had risen from being an unknown band to the top of the music business and had all the wealth and fame that came with that. Furthermore, Solomon realized death comes to everyone and there must be something more.

Livgren wrote:

All we do, crumbles to the ground though we refuse to see, Dust in the Wind, All we are is dust in the wind, Don’t hang on, Nothing lasts forever but the Earth and Sky, It slips away, And all your money won’t another minute buy.”

Take a minute and compare Kerry Livgren‘s words to that of the late British humanist H.J. Blackham:

On humanist assumptions, life leads to nothing, and every pretense that it does not is a deceit. If there is a bridge over a gorge which spans only half the distance and ends in mid-air, and if the bridge is crowded with human beings pressing on, one after the other they fall into the abyss. The bridge leads nowhere, and those who are pressing forward to cross it are going nowhere….It does not matter where they think they are going, what preparations for the journey they may have made, how much they may be enjoying it all. The objection merely points out objectively that such a situation is a model of futility“( H. J. Blackham, et al., Objections to Humanism (Riverside, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1967).

Harold John Blackham (31 March 1903 – 23 January 2009)

_____________________________________

Both Kerry Livgren and the bass player DAVE HOPE of Kansas became Christians eventually. Kerry Livgren first tried Eastern Religions and DAVE HOPE had to come out of a heavy drug addiction. I was shocked and elated to see their personal testimony on The 700 Club in 1981 and that same  interview can be seen on youtube today. Livgren lives in Topeka, Kansas today where he teaches “Diggers,” a Sunday school class at Topeka Bible ChurchDAVE HOPE is the head of Worship, Evangelism and Outreach at Immanuel Anglican Church in Destin, Florida.

Solomon’s experiment was a search for meaning to life “under the sun.” Then in last few words in the Book of Ecclesiastes he looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture: “The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: Fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.”

The answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted.

Now on to the other topic I wanted to discuss with you today. I wanted to write you today for one reason. IS THERE A GOOD CHANCE THAT DEEP DOWN IN YOUR CONSCIENCE  you have repressed the belief in your heart that God does exist and IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THIS DEEP BELIEF OF YOURS CAN BE SHOWN THROUGH A LIE-DETECTOR? (Back in the late 1990’s I had the opportunity to correspond with over a dozen members of CSICOP on just this very issue.)

I have a good friend who is a street preacher who preaches on the Santa Monica Promenade in California and during the Q/A sessions he does have lots of atheists that enjoy their time at the mic. When this happens he  always quotes Romans 1:18-19 (Amplified Bible) ” For God’s wrath and indignation are revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who in their wickedness REPRESS and HINDER the truth and make it inoperative. For that which is KNOWN about God is EVIDENT to them and MADE PLAIN IN THEIR INNER CONSCIOUSNESS, because God  has SHOWN IT TO THEM,”(emphasis mine). Then he  tells the atheist that the atheist already knows that God exists but he has been suppressing that knowledge in unrighteousness. This usually infuriates the atheist.

My friend draws some large crowds at times and was thinking about setting up a lie detector test and see if atheists actually secretly believe in God. He discussed this project with me since he knew that I had done a lot of research on the idea about 20 years ago.

Nelson Price in THE EMMANUEL FACTOR (1987) tells the story about Brown Trucking Company in Georgia who used to give polygraph tests to their job applicants. However, in part of the test the operator asked, “Do you believe in God?” In every instance when a professing atheist answered “No,” the test showed the person to be lying. My pastor Adrian Rogers used to tell this same story to illustrate Romans 1:19 and it was his conclusion that “there is no such thing anywhere on earth as a true atheist. If a man says he doesn’t believe in God, then he is lying. God has put his moral consciousness into every man’s heart, and a man has to try to kick his conscience to death to say he doesn’t believe in God.”

(Adrian Rogers at White House)

It is true that polygraph tests for use in hiring were banned by Congress in 1988.  Mr and Mrs Claude Brown on Aug 25, 1994  wrote me a letter confirming that over 15,000 applicants previous to 1988 had taken the polygraph test and EVERY-TIME SOMEONE SAID THEY DID NOT BELIEVE IN GOD, THE MACHINE SAID THEY WERE LYING.

It had been difficult to catch up to the Browns. I had heard about them from Dr. Rogers’ sermon but I did not have enough information to locate them. Dr. Rogers referred me to Dr. Nelson Price and Dr. Price’s office told me that Claude Brown lived in Atlanta. After writing letters to all 9 of the entries for Claude Brown in the Atlanta telephone book, I finally got in touch with the Browns.

Adrian Rogers also pointed out that the Bible does not recognize the theoretical atheist.  Psalms 14:1: The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”  Dr Rogers notes, “The fool is treating God like he would treat food he did not desire in a cafeteria line. ‘No broccoli for me!’ ” In other words, the fool just doesn’t want God in his life and is a practical atheist, but not a theoretical atheist. Charles Ryrie in the The Ryrie Study Bible came to the same conclusion on this verse.

Here are the conclusions of the experts I wrote in the secular world concerning the lie detector test and it’s ability to get at the truth:

Professor Frank Horvath of the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University has testified before Congress concerning the validity of the polygraph machine. He has stated on numerous occasions that “the evidence from those who have actually been affected by polygraph testing in the workplace is quite contrary to what has been expressed by critics. I give this evidence greater weight than I give to the