The Houston Photograph: Difference between revisions

[[Image:Pillar_of_Fire_smallpic.jpg|frame|Picture taken in Houston, TX by Douglas Studios on January 24, 1950]]

{{TOCright}}

William Branham said that '''God would not allow a picture to be developed''' of Rev. Best pointing his finger at F.F. Bosworth

:''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)

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.  

#The picture '''never hung in the Hall of Religious Art''' in Washington, D.C.  In fact, the Hall of Religious Art appears to be a figment of William Branham;s imagination.

[[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. Instead, the top of his head is not lit and the light appears to be from a source beyond William Branham.  The most likely explanation for this is that the light is actually one of the indoor floodlight banks that was used in the Sam Houston Coliseum.  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. [[Image:Houston basketball light.jpg|left]]  

The picture immediately above on the right was taken in 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.

And this also lines up with the argument that the light passed through the lens of the camera and showed up on the negative.  Because of the principle of "depth of field", a picture taken with a telephoto lens would tend to cause anything in the background to be out of focus.  [[File:WMB pillar edited by pencilsmudge.jpg|right|The picture on the right has been edited]]And given the poor dynamic range of film in the 1950's, a bright light source such as a rack of flood lights, would look "blown out" or overexposed in the photograph, just as the "pillar of fire" appears to be completely white.

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 [[File:ED SULLIVAN floodlights.png|left|Another example of floodlights]]if the light was, in fact, a bank of floodlights then light did pass through the lens and did strike the negative.  Was the actual reason that 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.

It must also be appreciated that the picture of the basketball players is from 1969, almost 20 years after the photograph of William Branham was taken.  It is likely that the lighting for a church gathering would have been set up completely different from that of a basketball game and also likely that the light fixtures would have been completely different 20 years earlier.

[[File:George J Lacy.jpg|right|George and Lucile Lacy]]

William Branham appears to have invented all of these various stories in an attempt to hype the Houston photograph.

William Branham stated that a copy of the Houston photograph was in Washington, D.C.:

The problem with William Branham's statement is that there is no '''Hall of Religious Art''' in Washington, D.C.  There is a copy of the picture that someone sent to the U.S. Library of Congress for preservation.  But the photo does not hang on the wall and there is no caption underneath it.  Rather, it sits in a filing cabinet.  We have personally been to the Library of Congress and have seen the photo in the file folder.  It was never hanging on the wall but remains in a filing cabinet.<ref>[http://catalog.loc.gov/ Library of Congress Online Catalog]</ref>

:''And it was given into the hands of George J. Lacy... He kept the picture for two days; then he sent word, said, "We'll give the reading on it, and let you know about it on two o'clock, on the following afternoon, on the third day. Big bunch of photographers, and so forth, gathered in. Many of the people around the city, like the writer for the "Colliers" and "Times," they gathered in.

|}