11,141
edits
The Houston Photograph: Difference between revisions
→The Role of the FBI
No edit summary |
|||
| (18 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
==What William Branham said== | ==What William Branham said== | ||
[[Image:Debate.jpg|thumb|left|250px|Proof of a lie - photograph of Rev. Best pointing his finger at F.F. Bosworth]] | |||
William Branham said that '''God would not allow a picture to be developed''' of Rev. Best pointing his finger at F.F. Bosworth | William Branham said that '''God would not allow a picture to be developed''' of Rev. Best pointing his finger at F.F. Bosworth | ||
[[Houston debate article|Click here to read a copy of the January 24th, 1950 issue of The Houston Press.]] | |||
:''I seen him the night of the debate when this Angel of the Lord came down and had His picture taken that you see here now, they got of the meeting. It was Brother Bosworth who stood there that night, and this young fellow just out of the seminary, pointing his finger in that old saints face, and having him take his picture like this. And he shaking his fist in that old saintly man's face, and saying, "Now, take my picture. And now take my picture," like that. 'Cause he wanted six pictures taken; he could publish it in his paper in such positions as that. '''And Almighty God would not permit one of them to be developed.''' Every one of them was perfect negative. That's right.'' (Chicago, July 20, 1954) | :''I seen him the night of the debate when this Angel of the Lord came down and had His picture taken that you see here now, they got of the meeting. It was Brother Bosworth who stood there that night, and this young fellow just out of the seminary, pointing his finger in that old saints face, and having him take his picture like this. And he shaking his fist in that old saintly man's face, and saying, "Now, take my picture. And now take my picture," like that. 'Cause he wanted six pictures taken; he could publish it in his paper in such positions as that. '''And Almighty God would not permit one of them to be developed.''' Every one of them was perfect negative. That's right.'' (Chicago, July 20, 1954) | ||
:''So then when he pulled the first picture out of Mr. Best with Mr. Bosworth, it was negative. '''God wouldn’t permit that taken against that saintly old man.''' He pulled out the next one: negative. He pulled out all six of them, and every one of them was blank. And when he pulled out the other one, there was the Angel of God on the picture. He had a heart attack.<ref> William Branham, 53-1129E - Testimony, para. 34</ref> | |||
'''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''' | ||
| Line 34: | Line 36: | ||
There are some specific facts that do not agree with William Branham's version of the events: | There are some specific facts that do not agree with William Branham's version of the events: | ||
#'''God did allow''' developing of the picture of Rev. Best pointing his finger at F.F. Bosworth. In fact, it was published in the newspaper as shown above on the right. | #'''God did allow''' developing of the picture of Rev. Best pointing his finger at F.F. Bosworth. In fact, it was published in the newspaper as shown above on the right. This is proof that William Branham was not being honest. | ||
#There is '''no record''' of George Lacy ever referring to the photograph as supernatural. | #There is '''no record''' of George Lacy ever referring to the photograph as supernatural. | ||
#The '''FBI were never involved''' in the examination of the photograph. | #The '''FBI were never involved''' in the examination of the photograph. | ||
#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 | #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. | ||
==Scepticism== | ==Scepticism== | ||
[[Image:Houston_basketball.JPG|frame|Notice the light by the players hand]] | [[Image:Houston_basketball.JPG|frame|250px|Notice the light by the players hand]] | ||
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. | 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. | ||
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]] | 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|250px|left]] | ||
===A Better Explanation?=== | ===A Better Explanation?=== | ||
| Line 50: | Line 52: | ||
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. | 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. | 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|250px|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. | ||
===The Light Struck the Lens=== | ===The Light Struck the Lens=== | ||
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 | 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? | ||
If the "pillar of fire" was an actual light source above William Branham's head that showed up on the negative, why doesn't the photo look more like the edited version the right? | If the "pillar of fire" was an actual light source above William Branham's head that showed up on the negative, why doesn't the photo look more like the edited version the right? | ||
| Line 62: | Line 64: | ||
==The Role of the FBI== | ==The Role of the FBI== | ||
[[ | [[Image:FBI letter to Knollwood-min.png|right|250px|Letter from the FBI]] | ||
William Branham stated many times that the FBI was somehow involved in authenticating the Houston photograph: | William Branham stated many times that the FBI was somehow involved in authenticating the Houston photograph: | ||
| Line 73: | Line 75: | ||
George Lacy was the fifth president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, which he helped found in 1942. He owned and operated an indepedent forensics lab in Houston, Texas. There are a number of things that William Branham was not honest about relating to Mr. Lacy's involvement with the picture: | George Lacy was the fifth president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, which he helped found in 1942. He owned and operated an indepedent forensics lab in Houston, Texas. There are a number of things that William Branham was not honest about relating to Mr. Lacy's involvement with the picture: | ||
#Mr. Lacy was | #The FBI confirmed in a letter dated September 5, 1974 that''' Mr. Lacy was NEVER an employee of the FBI'''. He was '''NEVER''' the head of the FBI for fingerprint and documents. | ||
#The FBI had no involvement with the examination of the Houston photograph. | #The FBI had no involvement with the examination of the Houston photograph. | ||
#Mr. Lacy lived and practiced in Houston and was not brought from California to Houston to examine the photograph. | #Mr. Lacy lived and practiced in Houston and was not brought from California to Houston to examine the photograph. | ||
On August 24, 1974, Knollwood Church in Xenia, Ohio wrote to the FBI regarding claims that message followers were making about the Houston photograph. A copy of their letter and the FBI response can be found here - [[File:FBI responsel to Knollwood.pdf]]. | |||
William Branham appears to have invented all of these various stories in an attempt to hype the Houston photograph. | William Branham appears to have invented all of these various stories in an attempt to hype the Houston photograph. | ||
==Report by George J. Lacy== | ==Report by George J. Lacy== | ||
[[Image:George_Lacy_Doc2.jpg| | [[Image:George_Lacy_Doc2.jpg|right|250px|Report by George J. Lacy]] | ||
After conferring with William Branham, Gordon Lindsay arranged for the negative to be turned over to George Lacy to examine the negative. | After conferring with William Branham, Gordon Lindsay arranged for the negative to be turned over to George Lacy to examine the negative. | ||
| Line 87: | Line 91: | ||
==The Hall of Religious Art in Washington, D.C.== | ==The Hall of Religious Art in Washington, D.C.== | ||
William Branham | William Branham said many times that the Houston photograph was hanging in a special gallery in Washington, DC: | ||
:''How many’s ever seen the picture of that Angel of the Lord, let’s see your hands up. Of course…Sure. That’s been traced. '''It’s in the Religious Hall of Art in Washington, DC''', copyrighted. The only supernatural Being was ever scientifically proven to be photographed.<ref>William Branham, 59-0418 - A Time Of Decision, para. 72</ref> | |||
It appears that at some point in time, William Branham became aware that the "Religious Hall of Religious History" (yes, it kept changing) was not in existence and the picture was not there. Rather than admit that he was wrong, William Branham made up a story that the picture had been moved to Germany: | |||
:''As you all have seen, the Light (which the United States has copyrighted in the Washington, DC, hanging in the '''Religious Hall of—of religious history, in Washington, DC''') is the only supernatural Being that was ever photographed in all the world. Hangs in the halls of Germany where they’ve taken it.<ref>William Branham, 61-0519 - Sirs, We Would See Jesus, para. 94</ref>'' | |||
And where are the "halls of Germany". Something else that William Branham invented? | |||
William Branham then went back to his story that a copy of the Houston photograph was in Washington, D.C. but now it had a note under it: | |||
:''And one of them is in Washington, DC, in '''the religious Hall of Art''', with '''a note under it, "The only supernatural being was ever photographed in the history of the world."''' And now, then, if you're ever through there, drop in, see it.<ref>63-0606 SHOW.US.THE.FATHER TUCSON.AZ</ref>''' | |||
The problem with William Branham's statement is that '''there is no Hall of Religious Art''' in Washington, D.C. The picture was never hanging in any kind of gallery there. There was never any note under it. The United States never copyrighted it (the photographer did). | |||
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. The Library of Congress also includes pictures of other famous people like Mother Teresa, Al Capone and Adolf Hitler.<ref>[http://catalog.loc.gov/ Library of Congress Online Catalog]</ref> | |||
There are a number of fake photographs that have been photoshopped to indicate that they were taken in the "Hall of Religious Art" but they are simply the invention of message believers that would rather create a lie than admit they are wrong. You can [[Games that message people play|see an example of one of the fake pictures here]]. | |||
==William Branham's comments about George Lacy== | ==William Branham's comments about George Lacy== | ||
| Line 118: | Line 136: | ||
{{Bottom of Page}} | {{Bottom of Page}} | ||
[[Category:Honesty and Credibility]] | |||
[[Category:Supernatural vindication]] | |||
[[Category:William Branham pointing to himself]] | |||