vendredi 27 avril 2018

Herman Dooyeweerd: The central and radical unity of our existence

“To illustrate totality and temporality, Dooyeweerd uses the image of the prism. Totality is analogous to white light before it is refracted by a prism into many colours. In this analogy, the prism is cosmic time, which refracts the totality into the differentiated and  individuated temporal reality. The unrefracted light is the time-transcending or supratemporal totality of meaning of our cosmos, both as to its law and subject sides. And just as this unrefracted light has its origin in the Source of light, so this supratemporal totality of meaning has its origin in the Arché or Origin by whom and to whom it has been created. The totality and deeper unity of meaning ‘must transcend its modal diversity’ (NC I, 102; WdW I, 66-67).” J. Glenn Friesen, p7 Dooyeweerd, Spann, and the Philosophy of Totality’ (pdf)
___________________________________

The 15 EXPERIENTIAL, IRREDUCIBLE, 
LAW-SPHERES of COSMIC TIME 
(Also called Aspects/ Modes of Consciousness/ Modalities/ Meaning-sides)
_______________________________________
IMPORTANT NOTE 
ON DOOYEWEERD'S USE OF THE TERM 
“RELIGION” -
“To the question, what is understood here by religion? I reply: the innate impulse of human selfhood to direct itself toward the true or toward a pretended absolute Origin of all temporal diversity of meaning, which it finds focused concentrically in itself." 
(Herman Dooyeweerd, Prolegomena
New Critique of Theoretical Thoughtp57)
_______________________________________
The central and radical 
unity of our existence
The following is an extract from Herman Dooyeweerd's 
A New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol 1, pp 60-64)

The supra-individual character of the starting-point.
The central and radical unity of our existence is at the same time individual and supra-individual; that is to say, in the individual I-ness it points beyond the individual ego toward that which makes the whole of mankind spiritually one in root in its creation, fall and redemption.

According to our Christian faith, all humanity is spiritually included in Adam. In him the whole human race has fallen, and in mankind also the entire temporal cosmos, which was concentrated in it. In Jesus Christ, the entire new humanity is one in root, as the members of one body.

Our I-ness is, in other words, rooted in the spiritual community of mankind. It is no self-sufficient "substance", no "windowless monad", but it lives in the spiritual community of the we, which is directed to a Divine Thou, according to the original meaning of creation.


The meaning of the central command of love.
This is the deep meaning of the central command of love: Thou shalt love God above all and thy neighbour as thyself...

The spirit of community and the religious basic motive.
Now a religious community is maintained by a common spirit, which as a dynamis, as a central motive power, is active in the concentration-point of human existence. This spirit of community works through a religious ground-motive, which gives contents to the central mainspring of the entire attitude of life and thought...

Since the fall and the promise of the coming Redeemer, there are two central mainsprings operative in the heart of human existence. The first is the dynamis of the Holy Spirit, which by the moving power of God's Word, incarnated in Jesus Christ, re-directs to its Creator the creation that had apostatized in the fall from its true Origin. This dynamis brings man into the relationship of sonship to the Divine Father. Its religious ground-motive is that of the Divine Word-Revelation, which is the key to the understanding of Holy Scripture: the motive of creation, fall, and redemption by Jesus Christ in the communion of the Holy Spirit.

The second central mainspring is that of the spirit of apostasy from the true God. As religious dynamis (power), it leads the human heart in an apostate direction, and is the source of all deification of the creature. It is the source of all absolutizing of the relative even in the theoretical attitude of thought. By virtue of its idolatrous character, its religious ground-motive can receive very diverse contents.


The Greek form-matter motive and the modern Humanistic motive of nature and freedom
In Western thought, this apostate spirit has disclosed itself chiefly in two central motives, namely, (1) that which has dominated the classical Greek world of culture and thought, and which has been brought (since the time of ARISTOTLE) under the fixed designation of the form-matter motive, and (2) that of the modern Humanistic life- and world-view, which, since the time of IMMANUEL KANT, has been called the motive of nature and freedom. Since the 18th century, this latter motive came more and more to dominate the world of Western culture and thought.

The former motive originated from the encounter of the older pre-Homeric Greek religion of life (one of the different nature religions) with the later cultural religion of the Olympic gods. The older religion of life deified the eternally flowing Stream of Life, which is unable to fix itself in any single individual form. But out of this stream there proceed periodically the generations of transitory beings, whose existence is limited by an individual form, as a consequence of which they are subjected to the horrible fate of death, the anangkè or the heimarmen tychè. This motive of the formless eternally flowing Stream of life is the matter-motive of the Greek world of thought. It found its most pregnant expression in the worship of DIONYSUS, which had been imported from Thrace.


On the other hand, the form-motive was the mainspring of the more recent Olympian religion, the religion of form, measure and harmony, which rested essentially upon the deification of the cultural aspect of Greek society (the Olympian gods were personified cultural powers). It acquired its most pregnant expression in the Delphic Apollo as law-giver. The Olympian gods leave mother earth with its ever flowing Stream of life and its threatening anangkè. They acquire Olympus for their seat, and have an immortal individual form, which is not perceptible to the eye of sense. But they have no power over the fate of mortals.

The form-matter motive itself was independent of the mythological forms which it received in the old nature-religions and the new Olympian culture-religion. It has dominated Greek thought from the outset.

The autonomy which philosophic theoria demanded, in opposition to popular belief, implied, as we have observed in an earlier context, only an emancipation from the mythological forms which were bound to sensory representation. It did not at all imply a loosening of philosophic thought from the central religious ground-motive which was born out of the encounter of the culture-religion with the older religion of life.

The modern Humanistic ground-motive of nature and freedom, which we shall presently subject to a detailed investigation in the transcendental criticism of Humanistic philosophy, has taken its rise from the religion of the free autonomous human personality and that of modern science evoked by it, and directed to the domination of nature. It is to be understood only against the background of the three ground-motives that formerly gave the central direction to Western thought, namely, the form-matter motive, the motive of creation, fall and redemption, and the scholastic motive of nature and grace. The last-named motive was introduced by Roman-Catholicism and directed to a religious synthesis between the two former motives.

It is not surprising, that the apostate mainspring can manifest itself in divergent religious motives. For it never directs the attitude of life and thought to the true totality of meaning and the true radix of temporal reality, because this is not possible without the concentric direction to the true Origin.

Idolatrous absolutizing is necessarily directed to the speciality of meaning, which is thereby dissociated from its temporal coherence, and consequently becomes meaningless and void. This is the deep truth in the time-honoured conception of the fall as a privatio, a deprivation of meaning, and as a negation, a nothingness.


Sin as privatio and as dynamis. No dialectical relation between creation and fall.
However, the central dynamis of the spirit of apostasy is no "nothing"; it springs from the creation, and cannot become operative beyond the limits in which it is bound to the divine order of meaning. Only by virtue of the religious concentration [concentric] impulse, which is concreated [ie created at the same time] in the human heart, can the latter direct itself to idols. The dynamis of sin can unfold itself only in subjection to the religious concentration-law of human existence. Therefore, the apostle PAUL says, that without the law there is no sin and that there is a law of sin.

Consequently, there can be no inner contradiction between creation and fall as long as they are understood in their Biblical sense. A contradiction would exist, if, and only if, sin were to have not merely an imaginary but a real power in itself, independent of creation.

The dialectical character of the apostate ground-motives. Religious and theoretic dialectic.
On the contrary, it belongs to the inner nature of the idolatrous ground-motives, that they conceal in themselves a religious antithesis.

For the absolutizing of special modal aspects of meaning, which in the nature of the case are relative, evokes the correlata of these latter. These correlata now in religious consciousness claim an absoluteness opposed to that of the deified aspects.

This brings a religious dialectic into these basic motives, that is to say, they are in fact composed of two religious motives, which, as implacable opposites, drive human action and thought continually in opposite directions, from one pole to the other. I have subjected this religious dialectic to a detailed investigation in the first volume of my new trilogy, Reformation and Scholasticism in Philosophy. And I demonstrated, that this dialectic is quite different from the theoretical one which is inherent in the intentional antithetical gegenstand-relation of theoretic thought.

For theoretical antithesis is by nature relative and requires a theoretical synthesis to be performed by the thinking "self". On the other hand, an antithesis in the religious starting-point of theoretical thought does not allow of a genuine synthesis. In the central religious sphere the antithesis necessarily assumes an absolute character, because no starting-point beyond the religious one is to be found from which a synthesis could he effectuated.


(Herman Dooyeweerd, A New Critique of Theoretical ThoughtVol 1, pp 60-64)

samedi 14 avril 2018

J. Glenn Friesen: New Research on Groen van Prinsterer and the idea of Sphere Sovereignty


The 15 EXPERIENTIAL, IRREDUCIBLE, 
LAW-SPHERES of COSMIC TIME 
(Also called Aspects/ Modes of Consciousness/ Modalities/ Meaning-sides) 
______________________________________
New Research on 
Groen van Prinsterer 
and the idea of 
Sphere Sovereignty
by J. Glenn Friesen
PDF Download HERE (26 pages)

Abstract
Historians of reformational philosophy often claim that Abraham Kuyper obtained the idea of “Sovereignty in its own sphere” from Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer. But very little historical research has been done on Groen’s sources for and development of this idea. The first use of the Dutch phrase “souvereiniteit in eigen sfeer” is much earlier than previously thought; it was used in 1853 by J.I. Doedes, an associate of the “ethical theologian” Chantepie de la Saussaye. Groen became aware of the ideas of Franz von Baader through journals founded by them, and by reading and corresponding with them and others like J.H. Gunning Jr., and Friedrich Fabri. Groen himself owned copies of some of Baader’s books. Groen also relied strongly on the work of the jurist Friedrich Julius Stahl, who was 37 years younger than Baader, but taught for a while at the same Munich university, and shared Baader’s anti-revolutionary ideas.

Keywords
Sphere sovereignty or "souvereiniteit in eigen kring"; church, state and school; G. Groen van Prinsterer; Abraham Kuyper; Friedrich Julius Stahl; Anti-Revolutionary; Franz von Baader; Herman Dooyeweerd

From pdf page 22:
"12. To say that institutions A and B have sphere sovereignty in relation to each other, we need some kind of organicist model of head and limbs, of center and periphery. Just as all modes of consciousness relate to a central selfhood or heart, all institutions relate to a central Body of Christ, or New Root. These ideas of heart and root are not found in classical Calvinism. They are found in Baader (Friesen 2015, 82-3).

13. Dooyeweerd, following Baader, insists that the organic center is above time so that it may (as supratemporal selfhood) govern the refracted temporal and peripheral modes of consciousness and (as supratemporal Body of Christ) govern temporal institutions. Classical Calvinism does not have Dooyeweerd’s distinctions of time, supratemporal and eternal. They are found in Baader (Friesen 2015, 36-38, 52-55)." 
_______________________________
Visit also Dr J. Glenn Friesen's webpages:

_______________________________
_______________________________
J. Glenn Friesen's
_______________________________
_______________________________

mardi 10 avril 2018

Herman Dooyeweerd: The Radical Cosmic Fall

Alexander the Great at the Battle of Issus


The 15 EXPERIENTIAL, IRREDUCIBLE, 
LAW-SPHERES of COSMIC TIME 
(Also called Aspects/ Modes/ Modalities/ Meaning-sides) 
______________________________________
Herman Dooyeweerd:
The Radical Cosmic Fall

______________________________________
1. Sin and the dialectical conception of guilt in Greek ('Form versus Matter') and Humanistic ('Nature versus Freedom') philosophy.
The Greek religious consciousness only recognized the conflict between the principles of form and matter in humanity. Humanism only acknowledged the conflict between sensory nature (determined by the mechanical law of causality) and the "rational autonomous freedom" of human personality. This latter opposition, even in its Kantian conception, only arrived at the recognition of an evil moral inclination of man to substitute in place of the moral law (the categorical imperative) the sensory desires as a motive for action.

Both the Greek and the Humanistic oppositions do not touch the religious root of human existence, but only the temporal branches of human life. They are only absolutized here in a religious sense. Their concept of guilt, in consequence, is of a merely dialectical character. It consists of a depreciation of an abstract complex of functions of the created cosmos over against another abstracted and deified complex.

In its revelation of the fall, however, just like in that of creation, the Word of God penetrates to the root, to the religious centre of human nature.

The fall is the apostasy of this centre, of this radix of existence, it is the falling away from God. This was spiritual death, because it is the apostasy from the absolute source of Life. Consequently the fall was radical. It involved the whole temporal cosmos, since the latter had its religious root only in mankind. Every conception which denies this radical sense of the fall, (even though it uses the term "radical" as in KANT'S conception of the "radical evil" in man), is diametrically opposed to the basic motive of Holy Scripture. Since, as we have seen, the revelation of the fall does not in any way mean the recognition of an antithetic principle of origin which is opposed to the Creator, sin cannot be thought of as standing in a dialectical relation to the creation.

And because of the radical character of sin, redemption in Christ Jesus must also be radical.

The Divine Word, through which, according to the pronouncement of John's gospel, all things were made, became flesh in Jesus Christ. The Word has entered into the root and the temporal ramifications, in body and soul, of human nature. And therefore it has brought about a radical redemption. Sin is not dialectically reconciled, but it is really propitiated. And in Christ as the new root of the human race, the whole temporal cosmos, which was religiously concentrated in man, is in principle again directed toward God and thereby wrested free from the power of Satan. However, until the return of Christ, even humanity which is renewed in Him still shares in the apostate root of mankind. Consequently, the struggle of the Kingdom of God continues to be waged against the kingdom of darkness until the "consommatio saeculi".

God maintains the fallen cosmos in His gratia communis (common grace) by His creating Word. The redeemed creation shall finally be freed from its participation in the sinful root of human nature and shall shine forth in a higher perfection.

2. Once again the inner reformation 
of philosophic thought.
When the central motive of the Christian religion, which we have just described, rules theoretical thought, this must, as we stated in the Prolegomena, necessarily lead to an inner reformation of the theoretical vision of temporal reality. The integral and radical character of this ground-motive destroys at its very roots any dualistic conception of the coherence and mutual relation of the theoretically abstracted modal aspects.

There is no longer room for a so-called dichotomy between the pre-logical aspects on the one hand, and the logical and post-logical on the other. There is no place for a dichotomy between "sensory nature" and "super-sensory freedom" or for a hypostatizing [absolutizing] of the so-called natural laws in opposition to norms which are set in contrast with each other without any mutual coherence and deeper radical unity.

On the contrary, in the structure of every aspect of reality is expressed the unbreakable integral coherence with all the others. This is explained by the fact that the aspects are one in their religious root and Origin, in accordance with the Biblical motive of creation.

And this motive will constantly stimulate theoretical thought to the discovery of the irreducible peculiar nature of the modal aspects, as well as of the total structures of individuality, because God also created the former according to their own nature.

The motives of the fall and redemption, which cannot be understood apart from the creation, shall then operate in the theoretical vision of reality, in the struggle against every absolutizing of the relative, by which the apostate religious motives withdraw thought from the radical unity and integral Origin of the temporal cosmos. They shall also find expression in the complete recognition of the conflicts in temporal reality which exist because of sin, and which cannot be cloaked or reasoned away by any rationalistic theodicy.

However, these conflicts shall never be ascribed to the cosmic order, as is done by dialectical irrationalism under the influence of an irrationalist turn of its dialectic ground-motive. The law of creation has remained the same in spite of sin. In fact, without the lex, sin would not be able to reveal itself in the temporal cosmos.

And finally the motive of sin will guard Christian philosophy from the ὑβρίς (pride) which considered itself to be free of theoretical errors and faults, and which believes itself to have a monopoly on theoretical truth.

Because of the solidarity of the fall and of the conserving operation of common grace, philosophical schools dominated by apostate ground-motives must be taken seriously. And in general the Biblical ground-motive will stimulate philosophic thought to an extremely critical attitude against the disguising of apostate super-theoretical prejudices by clothing them in the form of universally valid theoretical axioms.

If the central ground-motive of creation, the fall and redemption is to have the above-sketched reforming influence upon philosophical thought, this motive must, as we have shown in our transcendental critique, determine the content of our cosmonomic Idea and must exclude all dialectical motives which lead thought in an apostate direction. However, Christian philosophy did not follow this course in the patristic or medieval period. In the very first centuries of the Christian church, the latter had to wage a life-and-death struggle in order to save the Biblical ground-motive from being strangled by that of the Greeks. In this struggle was formulated the dogma of the Divine essential unity (homoousia) of the Father and the Son (this was soon to include the Holy Spirit) and the dangerous influence of gnosticism in Christian thought was broken.

3.The speculative logos-theory.
Before this period, we find in various apologists, especially in the Alexandrian school of CLEMENS and ORIGEN, a speculative logos theory derived from the Jewish Hellenistic philosophy of PHILO. This logos-theory basically denaturalized the Biblical motive of creation (and so also the motives of the fall and redemption). It conceived of the divine creating Word (Logos) as a lower divine being which mediates between the divine unity and impure matter. The Alexandrian school thereby actually transformed the Christian religion into a high ethical theory, into a moralistically tinged theological and philosophic system, which as a higher gnosis was placed above the faith of the Church. Similarly, Greek philosophical theology had placed itself above the pistis of the common people.

It is in this period that the Church maintained unequivocally the unbreakable unity of the Old and New Testament in opposition to the gnostic division (which was also defended by MARCION in the second century A.D.). It thus overcame the gnostic religious dualism which had driven a wedge between creation and redemption, and thereby had fallen back into a dualistic principle of origin.
(Herman Dooyeweerd, New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol I, pp 175-177)
______________________________________________
See also -
Herman Dooyeweerd:
Key of knowledge - Question of life and death
_________________________________
_________________________________
NOTE: 
Herman Dooyeweerd thought that the ultimate origin of our temporal Cosmos is scientifically unfathomable. Consequently, humility (from all sides) is the only appropriate stance. Dooyeweerd held that the core plain communication of Scripture precedes theorisation, propositionalisation, theologisation. This has been dismissed as "mysticism", but is actually no more mystical than unrefracted sunshine. Dooyeweerd rejected any rationalist-irrationalist dualism as a reductionism into disembodied theoretical abstraction - a characteristic he detected both in humanism and in much theology. Dooyeweerd rejected any dualism between the Word of God as manifest in Scripture and the Word of God as manifest in Nature. Despite such provisos, however, I do suggest we can yet profit from a "Young Earth" analysis such as:
by Jonathan Sarfati 
_______________________________

mercredi 4 avril 2018

Dooyeweerd: Supra-temporal heart of humankind

Dooyeweerd: 
Supra-temporal heart of humankind
God created humankind in His image. In the heart of humankind, the religious root, the center of its being, God concentrated all of creation toward His service; here He laid the supra-temporal root of all temporal creatures. This human heart, from which according to Scriptures flow the wellsprings of life, transcends all things temporal in the service of God. The whole religious sense (meaning) of God's creation lies in our heart, our entire ego, our complete self. This heart, in which according to the Word eternity has been laid, is the true supra-temporal center of human existence. At the same time it is the creaturely center of all of God's creation. The apostasy of this heart, of this root of creation, necessarily swept with it all temporal creation. In Adam not only all humankind fell, but also that entire temporal cosmos of which humankind was the crowned head. And in Christ, the Word become flesh, the second Covenant Head, God gave the new root of His redeemed creation, in Whom true humanity was implanted through self-surrender, through surrender of the center of existence, the heart.
(from "The Christian View of the State" by Herman Dooyeweerd)
See also 
Dr J. Glenn Friesen's 
Dooyeweerd Glossary entry 
for HEART
_________________

Herman Dooyeweerd: Excerpts from 'De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee' ('Philosophy of the Law-Idea')(Translation with study notes by J. Glenn Friesen)

_______________________________________
IMPORTANT NOTE 
ON DOOYEWEERD'S USE OF THE TERM 
“RELIGION” -
“To the question, what is understood here by religion? I reply: the innate impulse of human selfhood to direct itself toward the true or toward a pretended absolute Origin of all temporal diversity of meaning, which it finds focused concentrically in itself." 
(Herman Dooyeweerd, Prolegomena
New Critique of Theoretical Thoughtp57)
_______________________________________
Herman Dooyeweerd: 
Extracts from 
'De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee'
('The Philosophy of the Law-Idea') 
Translation with study notes by J. Glenn Friesen
 "Aanvankelijk sterk onder den invloed eerst van de Neo-Kantiaansche wijsbegeerte, later van Husserl's phaenomenologie, beteekende het groote keerpunt in mijn denken de ontdekking van den religieuzen wortel van het denken zelve, waardoor mij een nieuw licht opging over de doorloopende mislukking van alle, aanvankelijk ook door mijzelf ondernomen, pogingen een innerlijke verbinding tot stand te brengen tusschen het Christelijk geloof en een wijsbegeerte, die geworteld is in het geloof in de zelfgenoegzaamheid der menschelijke rede.  
Ik ging verstaan, welke centrale beteekenis toekomt aan het ‘hart’ dat door de Heilige Schrift telkens weer als de religieuze wortel van heel het menschelijk bestaan wordt in het licht gesteld.  
Vanuit dit centrale Christelijk gezichtspunt bleek mij een omwenteling in het wijsgeerig denken noodzakelijk van zoo radicaal karakter, dat Kant's ‘Copernicusdaad’ daartegenover slechts als een periphere kan worden gequalificeerd. Want hier is niet minder in het geding dan een relativeering van heel den tijdelijken kosmos zoowel in zijn zgn. ‘natuur’-zijden als in zijn zgn. ‘geestelijke’ zijden tegenover den religieuzen wortel der schepping in Christus. Wat beteekent tegenover deze Schriftuurlijke grondgedachte een omwenteling in de beschouwing der werkelijkheid, welke de ‘natuur’-zijden der tijdelijke realiteit relativeert ten opzichte van een theoretische abstractie als Kant's ‘homo noumenon’ of zijn ‘transcendentaal denksubject’?  
In het licht der Schrift bleek de geheele instelling van het wijsgeerig denken, welke dit laatste als zelfgenoegzaam proclameert, een standpunt in den af-val van de ware menschelijke zelfheid, wijl het in wezen het denken aftrekt van de goddelijke openbaring in Christus Jezus.  
De eerste consequentie van het Schriftuurlijk gezichtspunt in zake den wortel van heel de tijdelijke werkelijkheid was een radicale breuk met de wijsgeerige realiteitsbeschouwing, welke in het door mij zoo genoemde immanentie-standpunt wortelt." (Herman Dooyeweerd: Boek I. De wetsidee als grondlegging der wijsbegeerte, Voorwoord, pp VI,VII) 
*     *     * 
"At first I was strongly under the influence of neo-Kantian philosophy, and later of Husserl’s phenomenology. The great turning point in my thought was the discovery of the religious root of thought itself. This discovery shed a new light on the continuing failure of all attempts, including my own, to bring an inner connection between Christian belief and a philosophy that is rooted in the belief of the self-sufficiency of human reason. 
I came to understand the central significance that Holy Scripture repeatedly places on the 'heart' as the religious root of all human existence. 
From out of this central Christian viewpoint, it appeared to me that a revolution was necessary in philosophic thought, a revolution of so radical a character, that, compared with it, Kant’s 'Copernican revolution' can only be qualified as a revolution in the periphery. For what is at stake here is no less than a relativizing of the whole temporal cosmos in what we refer to as both its 'natural' sides as well as its 'spiritual' sides, over against the religious root of creation in Christ. In comparison with this basic Scriptural idea [grondgedachte], of what significance is a revolution in a view of reality that relativizes the 'natural' sides of temporal reality with respect to a theoretical abstraction such as Kant’s 'homo noumenon' or his 'transcendental subject of thought?' 
In the light of Scripture, the whole attitude of that kind of philosophic thought that proclaims thought to be self-sufficient, appears to be one that takes its standpoint in a falling away [af-val] from our true human selfhood, since it essentially withdraws human thought from the divine revelation in Jesus Christ. The first result of the Scriptural viewpoint in relation to the root of the entire temporal reality was a radical break with the philosophic view of reality rooted in what I have called the 'immanence standpoint.'" (Herman Dooyeweerd, Vol I, The Law-Idea as Foundation for Philosophy, Foreword (1935).
_______________________________
READ FULL ORIGINAL DUTCH TEXT OF
De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee
ONLINE HERE
_______________________________
J. Glenn Friesen's TRANSLATED EXCERPTS from 
De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee -
(PDF 113 pages)
_______________________________
J. Glenn Friesen's STUDY NOTES for 
De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee
(PDF 62 pages)

QUICK PAGE FINDER for Study Notes PDF:
(NOTE #1 = p1; #2 = p2; #3 = p8; #4 = p11; #5 = p11; #6 = p12; #7 = p13; #8 = p14; #9 = p14; #10 = p15; #11 = p16; #12 = p16; #13 = p17; #14 = p17; #15 = p17; #16 = p17; #17 = p19;  #18 = p19; #19 = p20; #20 = p20; #21 = p20; #22 = p21; #23 = p22; #24 = p22; #25 = p23; #26 = p23; #27 = p24; #28 = p24; #29 = p24; #30 = p25; #31 = p27; #32 = p27; #33 = p28; #34 = p29; #35 = p29; #36 = p29; #37 = p30; #38 = p30; #39 = p30; #40 = p31; #41 = p32; #42 = p33; #43 = p33; #44 = p34; #45 = p34; #46 = p35; #47 = p35; #48 = p36; #49 = p36; #50 = p37; #51 = p37; #52 = p37; #53 = p38; #54 = p39; #55 = p39; #56 = p39; #57 = p40;  #58 = p40; #59 = p40; #60 = p40; #61 = p40; #62 = p41;  #63 = p41; #64 = p41; #65 = p41; #66 = p43; #67 = p45; #68 = p46; #69 = p47; #70 = p48;  #71 = p48; #72 = p48; #73 = p49; #74 = p49; #75 = p49; #76 = p50; #77 = p50; #78 = p51; #79 = p51; #80 = p52; #81 = p52; #82 = p53; #83 = p53; #84 = p54; #85 = p54; #86 = p55; ; #87 = p55; #88 = p55; #89 = p55; #90 = p55; #91 = p56; #92 = p56; #93 = p56;  #94 = p57;  #95 = p57; #96 = p57; #97 = p58; #98 = p58; #99 = p59; #100 = p60; #101 = p61.
_______________________________
Visit also Dr J. Glenn Friesen's webpages:

_______________________________
_______________________________
J. GLENN FRIESEN'S 
_______________________________
_______________________________