The Houston Photograph: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
|}
|}


 
=Facts surrounding the picture=
==Facts surrounding the picture==
{{TOCright}}
{{TOCright}}
It was during the Houston campaign in 1950, that Rev. W. E. Best (representing the Houston Baptist Pastor's Conference) accused William Branham of racketeering and leading people astray.  A public challenge was issued, and F.F. Bosworth accepted a challenge on the subject of "Divine Healing Through the Atonement."  While Bro. Branham cautioned Brother Bosworth against being argumentative, the newspapers reported that the two ministers talked at once, and a fist-fight broke out in the audience.  The meeting was given front-page publicity in the Houston newspapers.  
It was during the Houston campaign in 1950, that Rev. W. E. Best (representing the Houston Baptist Pastor's Conference) accused William Branham of racketeering and leading people astray.  A public challenge was issued, and F.F. Bosworth accepted a challenge on the subject of "Divine Healing Through the Atonement."  While Bro. Branham cautioned Brother Bosworth against being argumentative, the newspapers reported that the two ministers talked at once, and a fist-fight broke out in the audience.  The meeting was given front-page publicity in the Houston newspapers.  
Line 17: Line 16:


Rev. Best secured the services of Mr. James Ayers and Mr. Ted Kipperman, professional photographers from Douglas Studios in Houston, to document the evening.  They were there in addition to the newpaper photographers.  After taking several photos of Rev. Best, the photographer snapped a picture of William Branham, who spoke briefly just before the service closed.
Rev. Best secured the services of Mr. James Ayers and Mr. Ted Kipperman, professional photographers from Douglas Studios in Houston, to document the evening.  They were there in addition to the newpaper photographers.  After taking several photos of Rev. Best, the photographer snapped a picture of William Branham, who spoke briefly just before the service closed.


==What William Branham said about the evening==
==What William Branham said about the evening==
Line 28: Line 26:
'''William Branham also said that it was George J. Lacy who first called it a supernatural light'''
'''William Branham also said that it was George J. Lacy who first called it a supernatural light'''
:''Mr. Lacy said it was the first time in all human history that a--a supernatural Being was ever photographed. They said it just a... that it's been said, a lot of times that those lights around the saints, and the unbelievers say that's some artist painted that picture. But said, "It surely must have been there, for that optical lens--mechanical lens of a camera won't take psychology. It was... It was there."'' (Minneapolis, July 14, 1950)
:''Mr. Lacy said it was the first time in all human history that a--a supernatural Being was ever photographed. They said it just a... that it's been said, a lot of times that those lights around the saints, and the unbelievers say that's some artist painted that picture. But said, "It surely must have been there, for that optical lens--mechanical lens of a camera won't take psychology. It was... It was there."'' (Minneapolis, July 14, 1950)
[[Image:Houston_basketball.JPG|frame|Notice the light by the players hand]]
=Scepticism=


==Scepticism==
George J. Lacy's report did not comment on whether the source of the light was natural (i.e. electric indoor lighting) or supernatural. While newspaper articles about the Coliseum around that time show that there were flood lights in the building (including photographs of a concert by the Beatles), George J. Lacy's report does not indicate anything about the source of the light. 


[[Image:Houston_basketball.JPG|frame|Notice the light by the players hand]]
Some observers note that if the pillar of fire was directly over William Branham's shoulder, it would have cast light on top of his head and the pulpit. [[Image:Houston basketball light.jpg|left]] Instead, the top of his head is not lit and the light appears to be from a source beyond William Branham.  These observers state that if the light was not from indoor lighting, it may have been the result of the flash from the camera reflecting off a metal pole or beam in the background.
George J. Lacy's report did not comment on whether the source of the light was natural (i.e. electric indoor lighting) or supernatural.  While newspaper articles about the Coliseum around that time show that there were flood lights in the building (including photographs of a concert by the Beatles), George J. Lacy's report does not indicate anything about the source of the light.
 
==A Better Explanation?==


Some observers note that if the pillar of fire was directly over William Branham's shoulder, it would have cast light on top of his head and the pulpit. Instead, the top of his head is not lit and the light appears to be from a source beyond William Branham.  These observers state that if the light was not from indoor lighting, it may have been the result of the flash from the camera reflecting off a metal pole or beam in the background.
The picture on the right is from the Sam Houston Coliseum in 1969. At right is Willie Somerset (#12) of ABA's Houston Mavericks basketball team.  Note the "pillar of fire" type light by the player's hand.  If we zoom into the light by the players hand (see photo on left), we see something that is not that dissimilar to that of the picture of the "pillar of fire" that was photographed over William Branham's head.


===A Better Explanation?===
And this also lines up with the argument that the light passed through the lens of the camera.


The picture on the right is from the Sam Houston Coliseum in 1969. At right is Willie Somerset (#12) of ABA's Houston Mavericks basketball team.  Note the "pillar of fire" type light by the player's hand.
==The Light Struck the Lens==


And this fulfill George Lacy's finding that the light struck the lens of the camera.
If, as George J. Lacy confirmed in his report on the photograph that light struck the negative, then it is hard to understand how no one else in the auditorium saw the light above William Branham's head.  But if the light was, in fact, a bank of floodlights then light did pass through the lens and did strike the negative.  The reason no one noticed the "pillar of fire" was that they all saw it for what it really was - one of the flood lights in the Sam Houston Coliseum.


==Report by George J. Lacy==
==Report by George J. Lacy==
Line 48: Line 50:
After his examination, Mr. Lacy gave a certified statement indicating that it was his opinion that the negative was genuine, and had not been "doctored" or retouched or the result of a double exposure.  Today, the picture sits in a filing cabinet in the U.S Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. [http://catalog.loc.gov/]
After his examination, Mr. Lacy gave a certified statement indicating that it was his opinion that the negative was genuine, and had not been "doctored" or retouched or the result of a double exposure.  Today, the picture sits in a filing cabinet in the U.S Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. [http://catalog.loc.gov/]


[[Image:George_Lacy_Doc2.jpg|frame|center|Report by George J. Lacy]]
[[Image:George_Lacy_Doc2.jpg|left|center|Report by George J. Lacy]]


{{Portal Navigation}}
{{Portal Navigation}}
|-
|-
|}
|}