Question for Roman Catholics (1 Viewer)

[CrossEyed]

US Bishops put out a statement this week that, among other things, said. "Political choices faced by citizens have an impact on general peace and prosperity and also may affect the individual's salvation," the bishops said.

I know how I feel about this, but I'm wondering what Roman Catholics think.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'm sure this will be a fun thread for some, but no thanks.

J

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I'm sure this will be a fun thread for some, but no thanks.J

 

[On The Rocks]

CrossEyed:

Question for Roman Catholics

This won't end well.

 

[CrossEyed]

I'm sure this will be a fun thread for some, but no thanks.J

So you don't think this is a legitimate topic for discussion?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Has anybody mentioned yet that the prospects of this thread blossoming into something constructive appear dim?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Has anybody mentioned yet that the prospects of this thread blossoming into something constructive appear dim?

Nope, you're in the clear.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Big fan of Friday coming early btw.

 

[CrossEyed]

So no Roman Catholics are bothered by the fact that the bishops have tied their salvation to how they vote?

 

[Keys Myaths]

Journalism is a discipline of gathering, writing and reporting news, and broadly it includes the process of editing and presenting the news articles. Journalism applies to various media, but not limited to newspapers, magazines, radio, and television.

While under pressure to be the first to publish their stories, news media organizations each adhere to its own standards of accuracy, quality, and style—usually editing and proofreading their reports prior to publication. Many news organizations claim proud traditions of holding government officials and institutions accountable to the public, while media critics have raised questions on the press accountability itself.

The word journalism is taken from French journal which in turn comes from Latin term diurnal or daily; The Acta Diurna a handwritten bulletin is put up daily in forum, the main public square in ancient Rome, was the world's first newspaper.

The digitalization of news production and the diffusion capabilities of the internet are challenging the traditional journalistic professional culture. The concept of participatory or (citizen journalism) proposes that amateur reporters can actually produce their own stories either inside or outside professional media outlets.

News-oriented journalism was described by former Washington Post editor, Phil Graham, as "a first rough draft of history", because journalists often record important historical events as they are happening, but just the same, they must produce their news articles on short deadlines.

Reporting Journalism's activities include stating what, when, where, how, why famously quoted by Rudyard Kipling (see the Five Ws), and stating the significance and effects of certain events or trends. Journalism exists in a number of media: newspapers, television , radio ,magazines and, most recently, the World Wide Web through the Internet.

Journalists report and write on a wide variety of subjects: politics on the international, national, provincial and local levels, economics and business on the same four levels, health and medicine, education, sports, hobbies and recreation, lifestyles, clothing, food, pets, and relationships; journalists report on anything that news organizations think consumers will read. Journalists can report for general interest news outlets like newspapers, news magazines and broadcast sources; general circulation specialty publications like trade and hobby magazines or for news publications and outlets with a select group of subscribers. Journalists are usually expected and required to go out to the scene of a story to gather information for their reports, and often may compose their reports in the field. They also use the telephone, the computer and the internet to gather information. However, more often those reports are written, and they are almost always edited in newsrooms, the offices where journalists and editors work together to prepare news content.

Journalists, especially if they cover a specific subject or area (a 'beat') are expected to cultivate sources, people in the subject or area, that they can communicate with, either to explain the details of a story, or to provide leads to other subjects of stories yet to be reported. They are also expected to develop their investigative skills to better research and report stories. Print journalism For more information about writing a news story, see News style

Print journalism can be split into several categories: newspapers, news magazines, general interest magazines, trade magazines, hobby magazines, newsletters, private publications, online news pages and others. Each genre can have its own requirements for researching and writing reports.

For example, newspaper journalists in the United States have traditionally written reports using the inverted pyramid style, although this style is used more for straight or hard news reports rather than features. Written hard news reports are expected to be spare in the use of words, and to list the most important information first, so that, if the story must be cut because there is not enough space for it, the least important facts will be automatically removed. Editors usually ensure that reports are written with as few words as possible. Feature stories are usually written in a looser style that usually depends on the subject matter of the report, and in general granted more space (see Feature-writing below).

News magazine and general interest magazine articles are usually written in different styles, with less emphasis on the inverted pyramid. Trade publications can be more news-oriented, while hobby publications can be more feature-oriented.

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Broadcast journalism

* 2 On-line (Cyber) journalism

* 3 Variations of journalism

o 3.1 Sports journalism

o 3.2 Science journalism

o 3.3 Investigative journalism

o 3.4 New journalism

o 3.5 Gonzo journalism

o 3.6 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

o 3.7 'Convergence Journalism'

* 4 Role of journalism in society

o 4.1 The Elements of Journalism

* 5 Professional and ethical standards

o 5.1 Recognition of excellence in journalism

o 5.2 Failing to uphold standards

o 5.3 Reporting versus editorializing

o 5.4 Ambush journalism

o 5.5 Gotcha journalism

* 6 Legal status

o 6.1 Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

o 6.2 Right to protect confidentiality of sources

o 6.3 Right of access to government information

* 7 See also

* 8 External links

[edit] Broadcast journalism

For more information about radio and television journalism, see News broadcasting

Radio journalists must gather facts to present them fairly and accurately, but also must find and record relevant and interesting sounds to add to their reports, both interviews with people involved in the story and background sounds that help characterize the story. Radio reporters may also write the introduction to the story read by a radio news anchor, and may also answer questions live from the anchor.

Television journalists rely on visual information to illustrate and characterize their reporting, including on-camera interviews with people involved in the story, shots of the scene where the story took place, and graphics usually produced at the station to help frame the story. Like radio reporters, television reporters also may write the introductory script that a television news anchor would read to set up their story. Both radio and television journalists usually do not have as much "space" to present information in their reports as print journalists. Television Journalists have to be well presented and well prepared.

[edit] On-line (Cyber) journalism

The growth of the Internet and World Wide Web has spawned the newest medium for journalism, on-line (Cyber) journalism. The speed at which news can be disseminated on the web, and the profound penetration to anyone with a computer and web browser, have greatly increased the quantity and variety of news reports available to the average web user.

The bulk of on-line journalism has been the extension of existing print and broadcast media into the web via web versions of their primary products. New reports that were set to be released at expected times now can be published as soon as they are written and edited, increasing the deadline pressure and fear of being scooped many journalists must deal with.

Most news websites are free to their users — one notable exception being the Wall Street Journal website, for which a subscription is required to view its contents — but some outlets, such as the New York Times website, offer current news for free but archived reports and access to opinion columnists and other non-news sections for a periodic fee. Attempts to start unique web publications, such as Slate and Salon, have met with limited success, in part because they do or did charge subscription fees.

Many newspapers are branching into new mediums because of the Internet. Their websites may now include video, podcasts, blogs and slide-shows. Story chat, where readers may post comments on an article, has changed the dialogue newspapers foster. Traditionally kept to the confines of the opinion section as letters to the editor, story chat has allowed readers to express opinions without the time delay of a letter or the approval of an editor.

The growth of blogs as a source of news and especially opinion on the news has forever changed journalism. Blogs now can create news as well as report it, and blur the dividing line between news and opinion. The debate about whether blogging is really journalism rages on.

[edit] Variations of journalism

Newspapers and periodicals often contain features (see under heading feature style at article news style) written by journalists, many of whom specialize in this form of in-depth journalism.

Feature articles usually are longer than straight news articles, and are combined with photographs, drawings or other "art." They may also be highlighted by typographic effects or colors.

Writing features can be more demanding than writing straight news stories, because while a journalist must apply the same amount of effort to accurately gather and report the facts of the story, the reporter must also find a creative and interesting way to write the article, especially the lead, or the first one or two paragraphs of the story. The lead must grab the reader's attention yet accurately embody the ideas of the article. Often the lead of a feature article is dictated by its subject matter. Journalists must work even harder to avoid clichéd images and words when writing the lead and the rest of the article.

In the last half of the 20th Century the line between straight news reporting and feature writing blurred as more and more journalists and publications experimented with different approaches to writing an article. Tom Wolfe, Gay Talese, Hunter S. Thompson and other journalists used many different approaches to writing news articles. Urban and alternative weekly newspapers went even further blurring the distinction, and many magazines fan more features than straight news.

Some television news shows experimented with alternative formats, and many TV shows that claimed to be news shows were not considered as such by many critics, because their content and methods did not adhere to accepted journalistic standards. National Public Radio, on the other hand, is considered a good example of a good mixture of straight news reporting, features, and combinations of the two, usually meeting standards of high quality. Other U.S. public radio news organizations have achieved similar results. A majority of newspapers still maintain a clear distinction between news and features, as do most television and radio news organizations.

[edit] Sports journalism

* For more information, see Sports journalism.

Sports journalism covers many aspects of human athletic competition, and is an integral part of most journalism products, including newspapers, magazines, and radio and television news broadcasts. While some critics don't consider sports journalism to be true journalism, the prominence of sports in Western culture has justified the attention of journalists to not just the competitive events of sports, but also to athletes and the business of sports.

Sports journalism in the United States has traditionally been written in a looser, more creative and more opinionated tone than traditional journalistic writing; the emphases on accuracy and underlying fairness is still a part of sports journalism. An emphasis on the accurate description of statistical performances of athletes is also an important part of sports journalism.

[edit] Science journalism

* For more information, see Science journalism.

Science journalism is a relatively new branch of journalism, in which journalists' reporting conveys information on science topics to the public. Science journalists must understand and interpret very detailed, technical and sometimes jargon-laden information and render it into interesting reports that are comprehensible to consumers of news media.

Scientific journalists also must choose which developments in science merit news coverage, as well as cover disputes within the scientific community with a balance of fairness to both sides but also with a devotion to the facts.

Many, but not all, journalists covering science have training in the sciences they cover, including several medical journalists who cover medicine.

[edit] Investigative journalism

* For more information, see Investigative reporting.

Investigative journalism, in which journalists investigate and expose unethical, immoral and illegal behavior by individuals, businesses and government agencies, can be complicated, time-consuming and expensive — requiring teams of journalists, months of research, interviews (sometimes repeated interviews) with numerous people, long-distance travel, computers to analyze public-record databases, or use of the company's legal staff to secure documents under freedom of information laws.

Because of its inherently confrontational nature, this kind of reporting is often the first to suffer from budget cutbacks or interference from outside the news department. Investigative reporting done poorly can also expose journalists and media organizations to negative reaction from subjects of investigations and the public, and accusations of gotcha journalism. When conducted correctly it can bring the attention of the public and government problems and conditions that the public deem need to be addressed, and can win awards and recognition to the journalists involved and the media outlet that did the reporting.

[edit] New journalism

* For more information, see New Journalism.

New Journalism was the name given to a style of 1960s and 1970s news writing and journalism which used literary techniques deemed unconventional at the time. The term was codified with its current meaning by Tom Wolfe in a 1973 collection of journalism articles.

It is typified by using certain devices of literary fiction, such as conversational speech, first-person point of view, recording everyday details and telling the story using scenes. Though it seems undisciplined at first, new journalism maintains elements of reporting including strict adherence to factual accuracy and the writer being the primary source. To get "inside the head" of a character, the journalist asks the subject what they were thinking or how they felt.

Because of its unorthodox style, new journalism is typically employed in feature writing or book-length reporting projects.

Many new journalists are also writers of fiction and prose. In addition to Wolfe, writers whose work has fallen under the title "new journalism" include Norman Mailer, Hunter S. Thompson, Joan Didion, Truman Capote, George Plimpton and Gay Talese.

[edit] Gonzo journalism

Gonzo journalism is a type of journalism popularized by the American writer Hunter S. Thompson, author of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, among other stories and books. Gonzo journalism is characterized by its punchy style, rough language, and ostensible disregard for conventional journalistic writing forms and customs. Gonzo journalism attempts to present a multi-disciplinary perspective on a particular story, drawing from popular culture, sports, political, philosophical and literary sources. Gonzo journalism has been styled eclectic or untraditional. It remains a feature of popular magazines such as Rolling Stone magazine. It has a good deal in common with new journalism and on-line journalism (see above).

[edit] 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

Another area of journalism that grew in stature in the 20th Century is 'celebrity' or 'people' journalism, which focuses on the personal lives of people, primarily celebrities, including movie and stage actors, musical artists, models and photographers, other notable people in the entertainment industry, as well as people who seek attention, such as politicians, and people thrust into the attention of the public, such as people who do something newsworthy.

Once the province of newspaper gossip columnists and gossip magazines, celebrity journalism has become the focus of national tabloid newspapers like the National Enquirer, magazines like People and Us Weekly, syndicated television shows like Entertainment Tonight, Inside Edition, The Insider, Access Hollywood, and Extra, cable networks like E!, A&E Network and The Biography Channel, and numerous other television productions and thouasands of websites. Most other news media provide some coverage of celebrities and people.

Celebrity journalism differs from feature writing in that it focuses on people who are either already famous or are especially attractive, and in that it often covers celebrities obsessively, to the point of these journalists behaving unethically in order to provide coverage. Paparazzi, photographers who would follow celebrities incessantly to obtain potentially embarrassing photographs, have come to characterize celebrity journalism.

[edit] 'Convergence Journalism'

An emerging form of journalism, which combines different forms of journalism, such as print, photographic and video, into one piece or group of pieces. Convergence Journalism can be found in the likes of CNN and many other news sites. The Washington Post has a notable amount of such.

[edit] Role of journalism in society

In the 1920s, as modern journalism was just taking form, writer Walter Lippmann and American philosopher John Dewey debated over the role of journalism in a democracy. Their differing philosophies still characterize a debate about the role of journalism in society and the nation-state.

Lippmann understood that journalism's role at the time was to act as a mediator or translator between the public and policymaking elites. The journalist became the middleman. When elites spoke, journalists listened and recorded the information, distilled it, and passed it on to the public for their consumption. His reasoning behind this was that the public was not in a position to deconstruct a growing and complex flurry of information present in modern society, and so an intermediary was needed to filter news for the masses. Lippman put it this way: The public is not smart enough to understand complicated, political issues. Furthermore, the public was too consumed with their daily lives to care about complex public policy. Therefore the public needed someone to interpret the decisions or concerns of the elite to make the information plain and simple. That was the role of journalists. Lippmann believed that the public would affect the decision making of the elite with their vote. In the meantime, the elite (i.e. politicians, policy makers, bureaucrats, scientists, etc.) would keep the business of power running. In Lippman's world, the journalist's role was to inform the public of what the elites were doing. It was also to act as a watchdog over the elites as the public had the final say with their votes. Effectively that kept the public at the bottom of the power chain, catching the flow of information that is handed down from experts/elites.

Dewey, on the other hand, believed the public was not only capable of understanding the issues created or responded to by the elite, it was in the public forum that decisions should be made after discussion and debate. When issues were thoroughly vetted, then the best ideas would bubble to the surface. Dewey believed journalists not only had to inform the public, but should report on issues differently than simply passing on information. In Dewey's world, a journalist's role changed. Dewey believed that journalists should take in the information, then weigh the consequences of the policies being enacted by the elites on the public. Over time, his idea has been implemented in various degrees, and is more commonly known as "community journalism."

This concept of Community Journalism is at the center of new developments in journalism. In this new paradigm, journalists are able to engage citizens and the experts/elites in the proposition and generation of content. It's important to note that while there is an assumption of equality, Dewey still celebrates expertise. Dewey believes the shared knowledge of many is far superior to a single individual's knowledge. Experts and scholars are welcome in Dewey's framework, but there is not the hierarchical structure present in Lippman's understanding of journalism and society. According to Dewey, conversation, debate, and dialogue lie at the heart of a democracy.

While Lippman's journalistic philosophy might be more acceptable to government leaders, Dewey's approach is a better descriptor of how many journalists see their role in society, and, in turn, how much of society expects journalists to function. Americans, for example, may criticize some of the excesses committed by journalists, but they tend to expect journalists to serve as watchdogs on government, businesses and other actors, enabling people to make informed decisions on the issues of the time.

[edit] The Elements of Journalism

According to The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosensteil, there are nine elements of journalism [1]. In order for a journalist to fulfill their duty of providing the people with the information they need to be free and self-governing, they must follow these guidelines:

1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.

2. Its first loyalty is to the citizens.

3. Its essence is discipline of verification.

4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.

5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.

6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.

7. It must strive to make the significant interesting, and relevant.

8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.

9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.

On the April 2007 edition of the book [2], they have added one additional element, the rights and responsibilites of citizens to make it a total of ten elements of journalism.

[edit] Professional and ethical standards

Since the development of professional journalism at the beginning of the 20th Century, journalists have been expected to follow a stringent code of journalistic conduct that requires them to, among other things:

* Use original sources of information, including interviews with people directly involved in a story, original documents and other direct sources of information, whenever possible, and cite the sources of this information in reports;

o For more information on using sources, see Journalism sourcing.

* Fully attribute information gathered from other published sources, should original sources not be available (to not do so is considered plagiarism; some newspapers also note when an article uses information from previous reports);

* Use multiple original sources of information, especially if the subject of the report is controversial;

* Check every fact reported;

* Find and report every side of a story possible;

* Report without bias, illustrating many aspects of a conflict rather than siding with one;

* Approach researching and reporting a story with a balance between objectivity and skepticism.

* Use careful judgment when organizing and reporting information.

* Be careful about granting confidentiality to sources (news organizations usually have specific rules that journalists must follow concerning grants of confidentiality);

* Decline gifts or favors from any subject of a report, and avoid even the appearance of being influenced;

* Abstain from reporting or otherwise participating in the research and writing about a subject in which the journalist has a personal stake or bias that cannot be set aside.

This was in stark contrast to the media climate prior to the 20th Century, where the media market was dominated by smaller newspapers and pamphleteers who usually had an overt and often radical agenda, with no presumpton of balance or objectivity. E.g., see (1).

[edit] Recognition of excellence in journalism

There are several professional organizations, universities and foundations that recognize excellence in journalism. The Pulitzer Prize, administered by Columbia University in New York City, is awarded to newspapers, magazines and broadcast media for excellence in various kinds of journalism. The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism gives the Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Awards for excellence in radio and television journalism, and the Scripps Howard Foundation gives the National Journalism Awards in 17 categories. The Society of Professional Journalists gives the Sigma Delta Chi Award for journalism excellence. In the television industry, the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences gives awards for excellence in television journalism.

[edit] Failing to uphold standards

Such a code of conduct can, in the real world, be difficult to uphold consistently. Journalists who believe they are being fair or objective may give biased accounts -- by reporting selectively, trusting too much to anecdote, or giving a partial explanation of actions. (See Media bias.) Even in routine reporting, bias can creep into a story through a reporter's choice of facts to summarize, or through failure to check enough sources, hear and report dissenting voices, or seek fresh perspectives.

As much as reporters try to set aside their prejudices, they may simply be unaware of them. Young reporters may be blind to issues affecting the elderly. A 20-year veteran of the "police beat" may be deaf to rumors of departmental corruption. Publications marketed to affluent suburbanites may ignore urban problems. And, of course, naive or unwary reporters and editors alike may fall prey to public relations, propaganda or disinformation.

News organizations provide editors, producers or news directors whose job is to check reporters' work at various stages. But editors can get tired, lazy, complacent or biased. An editor may be blind to a favorite reporter's omissions, prejudices or fabrications. (See Jayson Blair.) Provincial editors also may be ill-equipped to weigh the perspective (or check the facts of) a correspondent reporting from a distant city or foreign country. (See News management.)

A news organization's budget inevitably reflects decision-making about what news to cover, for what audience, and in what depth. Those decisions may reflect conscious or unconscious bias. When budgets are cut, editors may sacrifice reporters in distant news bureaus, reduce the number of staff assigned to low-income areas, or wipe entire communities from the publication's zone of interest.

Publishers, owners and other corporate executives, especially advertising sales executives, can try to use their powers over journalists to influence how news is reported and published. Journalists usually rely on top management to create and maintain a "firewall" between the news and other departments in a news organization to prevent undue influence on the news department. One journalism magazine, Columbia Journalism Review, has made it a practice to reveal examples of executives who try to influence news coverage, of executives who do not abuse their powers over journalists, and of journalists who resist such pressures.

Self-censorship is a growing problem in journalism, particularly in covering countries that sharply restrict press freedom. As commercial pressure in the media marketplace grows, media organizations are loath to lose access to high-profile countries by producing unflattering stories. For example, CNN admitted that it had practiced self-censorship in covering the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq in order to ensure continuted access after the regime had thrown out other media. CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour also complained of self-censorship during the invasion of Iraq due to the fear of alienating key audiences in the US. There are claims that the media are also avoiding covering stories about repression and human rights violations by the Iranian regime in order to maintain a presence in the country.

[edit] Reporting versus editorializing

Generally, publishers and consumers of journalism draw a distinction between reporting — "just the facts" — and opinion writing, often by restricting opinion columns to the editorial page and its facing or "op-ed" (opposite the editorials) page. Unsigned editorials are traditionally the official opinions of the paper's editorial board, while op-ed pages may be a mixture of syndicated columns and other contributions, frequently with some attempt to balance the voices across some political or social spectrum.

The distinction between reporting and opinion can break down. Complex stories often require summarizing and interpretation of facts, especially if there is limited time or space for a story. Stories involving great amounts of interpretation are often labelled "news analysis," but still run in a paper's news columns. The limited time for each story in a broadcast report rarely allows for such distinctions.

[edit] Ambush journalism

Ambush journalism refers to aggressive tactics practiced by journalists to suddenly confront with questions people who otherwise do not wish to speak to a journalist. The practice has particularly been applied by television journalists, such as those on the CBS-TV news show 60 Minutes and by Geraldo Rivera, currently on the Fox News cable channel, and by hundreds of American local television reporters conducting investigations.

The practice has been sharply criticized by journalists and others as being highly unethical and sensational, while others defend it as the only way to attempt to provide those subject to it an opportunity to comment for a report. Ambush journalism has not been ruled illegal in the United States, although doing it on private property could open a journalist to being charged with trespassing.

[edit] Gotcha journalism

* For more information, see Gotcha journalism.

Gotcha journalism refers to the deliberate manipulation of the presentation of facts in a report in order to portray a person or organization in a particular way that varies from an accurate portrayal based on balanced review of the facts available. In particular it is applied to broadcast journalism, where the story, images and interviews are tailored to create a particular impression of the subject matter.

It is considered highly unethical to engage in gotcha journalism. Many subjects of reporting have claimed to have been subjected to it, and some media outlets are guilty of deliberately biased reporting.

[edit] Legal status

For more information, see Freedom of the press

Journalists around the world often write about the governments in their nations, and those governments have widely varying policies and practices towards journalists, which control what they can research and write, and what press organizations can publish. Many Western governments guarantee the freedom of the press, and do relatively little to restrict press rights and freedoms, while other nations severely restrict what journalists can research and/or publish.

Journalists in many nations have enjoyed some privileges not enjoyed by members of the general public, including better access to public events, crime scenes and press conferences, and to extended interviews with public officials, celebrities and others in the public eye. These privileges are available because of the perceived power of the press to turn public opinion for or against governments, their officials and policies, as well as the perception that the press often represents their consumers. These privileges extend from the legal rights of journalists but are not guaranteed by those rights. Sometimes government officials may attempt to punish individual journalists who irk them by denying them some of these privileges extended to other journalists.

Nations or jurisdictions that formally license journalists may confer special privileges and responsibilities along with those licenses, but in the United States the tradition of an independent press has avoided any imposition of government-controlled examinations or licensing.[citation needed] Some of the states have explicit shield laws that protect journalists from some forms of government inquiry, but those statutes' definitions of "journalist" were often based on access to printing presses and broadcast towers. A national shield law has been proposed.

In some nations, journalists are directly employed, controlled or censored by their governments. In other nations, governments who may claim to guarantee press rights actually intimidate journalists with threats of arrest, destruction or seizure of property (especially the means of production and dissemination of news content), torture or murder.

Journalists who elect to cover conflicts, whether wars between nations or insurgencies within nations, often give up expectation to protection by government, if not giving up their rights to protection by government. Journalists who are captured or detained during a conflict are expected to be treated as civilians and to be released to their national government.

[edit] Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

Journalists enjoy similar powers and privileges as private citizens and organizations. The power of journalists over private citizens is limited by the citizen's rights to privacy. Many who seek favorable representation in the press (celebrities, for example) do grant journalists greater access than others enjoy. The right to privacy of a private citizen may be reduced or lost if the citizen is thrust into the public eye, either by their own actions or because they are involved in a public event or incident.

Citizens and private organizations can refuse to deal with some or all journalists; the powers the press enjoy in many nations often make this tactic ineffective or counter-productive.

Citizens in most nations also enjoy the right against being libeled or defamed by journalists, and citizens can bring suit against journalists who they claim have published damaging untruths about them with malicious disregard for the truth. Libel or defamation lawsuits can also become conflicts between the journalists' rights to publish versus the private citizen's right to privacy. Some journalists have claimed lawsuits brought against them and news organizations — or even the threat of such a lawsuit — were intended to stifle their voices with the threat of expensive legal procedings, even if plaintiffs cannot prove their cases. This is referred to as the Chilling effect.

In the United Kingdom, it is up to the journalist and/or their employers to defend against claims of defamation, opposed to other nations where the burden of proof is on the claimant.

In many nations, journalists and news organizations must function under similar threat of retaliation from private individuals or organizations as from governments. Criminals and criminal organizations, political parties, some zealous religious organizations, and even mobs of people have been known to punish journalists who speak or write about them in ways they do not like. Punishments can include threats, physical damage to property, assault, torture and murder.

[edit] Right to protect confidentiality of sources

For more information, see Protection of sources

Journalists' interaction with sources sometimes involves confidentiality, an extension of freedom of the press giving journalists a legal protection to keep the identity of a source private even when demanded by police or prosecutors; withholding sources can land journalists in contempt of court, or jailtime.

The scope of rights granted journalists varies from nation to nation; in the United Kingdom, for example, the government has had more legal rights to protect what it considers sensitive information, and to force journalists to reveal the sources of leaked information, than the United States. Other nations, particularly Zimbabwe and the People's Republic of China, have a reputation of persecuting journalists, both domestic and foreign.

In the United States, there has never been a right to protect sources in federal court. Some states provide varying degrees of such protection. However, federal courts will refuse to force journalists to reveal sources, unless the information the court seeks is highly relevant to the case, and there's no other way to get it. Journalists, like all citizens, who refuse to testify even when ordered to can be found in contempt of court and fined or jailed.

[edit] Right of access to government information

Like sources, journalists depend on the rights granted by government to the public and, by extension, to the press, for access to information held by the government. These rights also vary from nation to nation (see Freedom of information legislation) and, in the United States, from state to state. Some states have more open policies for making information available, and some states have acted in the last decade to broaden those rights. New Jersey, for example, has updated and broadened its Sunshine Law to better define what kinds of government documents can be withheld from public inquiry.

In the United States, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guarantees journalists the right to obtain copies of government documents, although the government has the right to redact, or black out, information from documents in those copies that FOIA allows them to withhold. Other federal legislation also controls access to information (see Freedom of information in the United States).

[edit] See also

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Journalism

Wikibooks

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of

How To Run A Newspaper

Wikiversity

At Wikiversity you can learn more and teach others about Journalism at:

The School of Journalism

Wikinews

Wikinews has related news:

Journalism

Journalism Portal

* History of Journalism

* History of American Newspapers

* Yellow journalism

* Fashion journalism

* Sports journalism

* Parachute journalism

* Journalism in Australia

* Journalism education

* Online Journalism

* Community journalism

* Reporters without borders

* Citizen journalism

* Advocacy journalism

* Environmental journalism

* Science journalism

* Video journalism

* Objectivity (philosophy) main article discussing the concept of objectivity in various fields (history, science, journalism, philosophy, etc.)

* Objectivity (journalism)

* Journalism ethics and standards

* Freedom of the press

* Journalist

* Magazine

* Mass media

* Newspaper

* Journalism school

* Pen & Pencil Club

[edit] External links

* Wikia has a wiki about this topic: journalism

* Society of Professional Journalists

* Journalism.org: Research, Resources and Ideas to Improve Journalism

* U of Iowa: Journalism and Mass Communication Resources

* American Journalism Review magazine

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism"

Categories: Articles with limited geographic scope | USA-centric | Articles with unsourced statements since June 2007 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since July 2007 | Journalism

 

[Lester Burnham]

I'm sure this will be a fun thread for some, but no thanks.J

So you don't think this is a legitimate topic for discussion?

No

 

[CYP]

I have a feeling God does not care who I vote for.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

This is so my head wants to explode.

 

[Genedoc]

So no Roman Catholics are bothered by the fact that the bishops have tied their salvation to how they vote?

Baptists have been doing it for decades...

 

[CrossEyed]

I'm sure this will be a fun thread for some, but no thanks.J

So you don't think this is a legitimate topic for discussion?

No

Why not?

 

[Ghost Rider]

So no Roman Catholics are bothered by the fact that the bishops have tied their salvation to how they vote?

It doesn't bother me. The bishop has a fancy title, but, if you are a believer, he is not who you ultimately answer to. If that makes me a bad Catholic, so be it.

 

[jbalicki10]

Journalism is a discipline of gathering, writing and reporting news, and broadly it includes the process of editing and presenting the news articles. Journalism applies to various media, but not limited to newspapers, magazines, radio, and television.

While under pressure to be the first to publish their stories, news media organizations each adhere to its own standards of accuracy, quality, and style—usually editing and proofreading their reports prior to publication. Many news organizations claim proud traditions of holding government officials and institutions accountable to the public, while media critics have raised questions on the press accountability itself.

The word journalism is taken from French journal which in turn comes from Latin term diurnal or daily; The Acta Diurna a handwritten bulletin is put up daily in forum, the main public square in ancient Rome, was the world's first newspaper.

The digitalization of news production and the diffusion capabilities of the internet are challenging the traditional journalistic professional culture. The concept of participatory or (citizen journalism) proposes that amateur reporters can actually produce their own stories either inside or outside professional media outlets.

News-oriented journalism was described by former Washington Post editor, Phil Graham, as "a first rough draft of history", because journalists often record important historical events as they are happening, but just the same, they must produce their news articles on short deadlines.

Reporting Journalism's activities include stating what, when, where, how, why famously quoted by Rudyard Kipling (see the Five Ws), and stating the significance and effects of certain events or trends. Journalism exists in a number of media: newspapers, television , radio ,magazines and, most recently, the World Wide Web through the Internet.

Journalists report and write on a wide variety of subjects: politics on the international, national, provincial and local levels, economics and business on the same four levels, health and medicine, education, sports, hobbies and recreation, lifestyles, clothing, food, pets, and relationships; journalists report on anything that news organizations think consumers will read. Journalists can report for general interest news outlets like newspapers, news magazines and broadcast sources; general circulation specialty publications like trade and hobby magazines or for news publications and outlets with a select group of subscribers. Journalists are usually expected and required to go out to the scene of a story to gather information for their reports, and often may compose their reports in the field. They also use the telephone, the computer and the internet to gather information. However, more often those reports are written, and they are almost always edited in newsrooms, the offices where journalists and editors work together to prepare news content.

Journalists, especially if they cover a specific subject or area (a 'beat') are expected to cultivate sources, people in the subject or area, that they can communicate with, either to explain the details of a story, or to provide leads to other subjects of stories yet to be reported. They are also expected to develop their investigative skills to better research and report stories. Print journalism For more information about writing a news story, see News style

Print journalism can be split into several categories: newspapers, news magazines, general interest magazines, trade magazines, hobby magazines, newsletters, private publications, online news pages and others. Each genre can have its own requirements for researching and writing reports.

For example, newspaper journalists in the United States have traditionally written reports using the inverted pyramid style, although this style is used more for straight or hard news reports rather than features. Written hard news reports are expected to be spare in the use of words, and to list the most important information first, so that, if the story must be cut because there is not enough space for it, the least important facts will be automatically removed. Editors usually ensure that reports are written with as few words as possible. Feature stories are usually written in a looser style that usually depends on the subject matter of the report, and in general granted more space (see Feature-writing below).

News magazine and general interest magazine articles are usually written in different styles, with less emphasis on the inverted pyramid. Trade publications can be more news-oriented, while hobby publications can be more feature-oriented.

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Broadcast journalism

* 2 On-line (Cyber) journalism

* 3 Variations of journalism

o 3.1 Sports journalism

o 3.2 Science journalism

o 3.3 Investigative journalism

o 3.4 New journalism

o 3.5 Gonzo journalism

o 3.6 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

o 3.7 'Convergence Journalism'

* 4 Role of journalism in society

o 4.1 The Elements of Journalism

* 5 Professional and ethical standards

o 5.1 Recognition of excellence in journalism

o 5.2 Failing to uphold standards

o 5.3 Reporting versus editorializing

o 5.4 Ambush journalism

o 5.5 Gotcha journalism

* 6 Legal status

o 6.1 Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

o 6.2 Right to protect confidentiality of sources

o 6.3 Right of access to government information

* 7 See also

* 8 External links

[edit] Broadcast journalism

For more information about radio and television journalism, see News broadcasting

Radio journalists must gather facts to present them fairly and accurately, but also must find and record relevant and interesting sounds to add to their reports, both interviews with people involved in the story and background sounds that help characterize the story. Radio reporters may also write the introduction to the story read by a radio news anchor, and may also answer questions live from the anchor.

Television journalists rely on visual information to illustrate and characterize their reporting, including on-camera interviews with people involved in the story, shots of the scene where the story took place, and graphics usually produced at the station to help frame the story. Like radio reporters, television reporters also may write the introductory script that a television news anchor would read to set up their story. Both radio and television journalists usually do not have as much "space" to present information in their reports as print journalists. Television Journalists have to be well presented and well prepared.

[edit] On-line (Cyber) journalism

The growth of the Internet and World Wide Web has spawned the newest medium for journalism, on-line (Cyber) journalism. The speed at which news can be disseminated on the web, and the profound penetration to anyone with a computer and web browser, have greatly increased the quantity and variety of news reports available to the average web user.

The bulk of on-line journalism has been the extension of existing print and broadcast media into the web via web versions of their primary products. New reports that were set to be released at expected times now can be published as soon as they are written and edited, increasing the deadline pressure and fear of being scooped many journalists must deal with.

Most news websites are free to their users — one notable exception being the Wall Street Journal website, for which a subscription is required to view its contents — but some outlets, such as the New York Times website, offer current news for free but archived reports and access to opinion columnists and other non-news sections for a periodic fee. Attempts to start unique web publications, such as Slate and Salon, have met with limited success, in part because they do or did charge subscription fees.

Many newspapers are branching into new mediums because of the Internet. Their websites may now include video, podcasts, blogs and slide-shows. Story chat, where readers may post comments on an article, has changed the dialogue newspapers foster. Traditionally kept to the confines of the opinion section as letters to the editor, story chat has allowed readers to express opinions without the time delay of a letter or the approval of an editor.

The growth of blogs as a source of news and especially opinion on the news has forever changed journalism. Blogs now can create news as well as report it, and blur the dividing line between news and opinion. The debate about whether blogging is really journalism rages on.

[edit] Variations of journalism

Newspapers and periodicals often contain features (see under heading feature style at article news style) written by journalists, many of whom specialize in this form of in-depth journalism.

Feature articles usually are longer than straight news articles, and are combined with photographs, drawings or other "art." They may also be highlighted by typographic effects or colors.

Writing features can be more demanding than writing straight news stories, because while a journalist must apply the same amount of effort to accurately gather and report the facts of the story, the reporter must also find a creative and interesting way to write the article, especially the lead, or the first one or two paragraphs of the story. The lead must grab the reader's attention yet accurately embody the ideas of the article. Often the lead of a feature article is dictated by its subject matter. Journalists must work even harder to avoid clichéd images and words when writing the lead and the rest of the article.

In the last half of the 20th Century the line between straight news reporting and feature writing blurred as more and more journalists and publications experimented with different approaches to writing an article. Tom Wolfe, Gay Talese, Hunter S. Thompson and other journalists used many different approaches to writing news articles. Urban and alternative weekly newspapers went even further blurring the distinction, and many magazines fan more features than straight news.

Some television news shows experimented with alternative formats, and many TV shows that claimed to be news shows were not considered as such by many critics, because their content and methods did not adhere to accepted journalistic standards. National Public Radio, on the other hand, is considered a good example of a good mixture of straight news reporting, features, and combinations of the two, usually meeting standards of high quality. Other U.S. public radio news organizations have achieved similar results. A majority of newspapers still maintain a clear distinction between news and features, as do most television and radio news organizations.

[edit] Sports journalism

* For more information, see Sports journalism.

Sports journalism covers many aspects of human athletic competition, and is an integral part of most journalism products, including newspapers, magazines, and radio and television news broadcasts. While some critics don't consider sports journalism to be true journalism, the prominence of sports in Western culture has justified the attention of journalists to not just the competitive events of sports, but also to athletes and the business of sports.

Sports journalism in the United States has traditionally been written in a looser, more creative and more opinionated tone than traditional journalistic writing; the emphases on accuracy and underlying fairness is still a part of sports journalism. An emphasis on the accurate description of statistical performances of athletes is also an important part of sports journalism.

[edit] Science journalism

* For more information, see Science journalism.

Science journalism is a relatively new branch of journalism, in which journalists' reporting conveys information on science topics to the public. Science journalists must understand and interpret very detailed, technical and sometimes jargon-laden information and render it into interesting reports that are comprehensible to consumers of news media.

Scientific journalists also must choose which developments in science merit news coverage, as well as cover disputes within the scientific community with a balance of fairness to both sides but also with a devotion to the facts.

Many, but not all, journalists covering science have training in the sciences they cover, including several medical journalists who cover medicine.

[edit] Investigative journalism

* For more information, see Investigative reporting.

Investigative journalism, in which journalists investigate and expose unethical, immoral and illegal behavior by individuals, businesses and government agencies, can be complicated, time-consuming and expensive — requiring teams of journalists, months of research, interviews (sometimes repeated interviews) with numerous people, long-distance travel, computers to analyze public-record databases, or use of the company's legal staff to secure documents under freedom of information laws.

Because of its inherently confrontational nature, this kind of reporting is often the first to suffer from budget cutbacks or interference from outside the news department. Investigative reporting done poorly can also expose journalists and media organizations to negative reaction from subjects of investigations and the public, and accusations of gotcha journalism. When conducted correctly it can bring the attention of the public and government problems and conditions that the public deem need to be addressed, and can win awards and recognition to the journalists involved and the media outlet that did the reporting.

[edit] New journalism

* For more information, see New Journalism.

New Journalism was the name given to a style of 1960s and 1970s news writing and journalism which used literary techniques deemed unconventional at the time. The term was codified with its current meaning by Tom Wolfe in a 1973 collection of journalism articles.

It is typified by using certain devices of literary fiction, such as conversational speech, first-person point of view, recording everyday details and telling the story using scenes. Though it seems undisciplined at first, new journalism maintains elements of reporting including strict adherence to factual accuracy and the writer being the primary source. To get "inside the head" of a character, the journalist asks the subject what they were thinking or how they felt.

Because of its unorthodox style, new journalism is typically employed in feature writing or book-length reporting projects.

Many new journalists are also writers of fiction and prose. In addition to Wolfe, writers whose work has fallen under the title "new journalism" include Norman Mailer, Hunter S. Thompson, Joan Didion, Truman Capote, George Plimpton and Gay Talese.

[edit] Gonzo journalism

Gonzo journalism is a type of journalism popularized by the American writer Hunter S. Thompson, author of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, among other stories and books. Gonzo journalism is characterized by its punchy style, rough language, and ostensible disregard for conventional journalistic writing forms and customs. Gonzo journalism attempts to present a multi-disciplinary perspective on a particular story, drawing from popular culture, sports, political, philosophical and literary sources. Gonzo journalism has been styled eclectic or untraditional. It remains a feature of popular magazines such as Rolling Stone magazine. It has a good deal in common with new journalism and on-line journalism (see above).

[edit] 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

Another area of journalism that grew in stature in the 20th Century is 'celebrity' or 'people' journalism, which focuses on the personal lives of people, primarily celebrities, including movie and stage actors, musical artists, models and photographers, other notable people in the entertainment industry, as well as people who seek attention, such as politicians, and people thrust into the attention of the public, such as people who do something newsworthy.

Once the province of newspaper gossip columnists and gossip magazines, celebrity journalism has become the focus of national tabloid newspapers like the National Enquirer, magazines like People and Us Weekly, syndicated television shows like Entertainment Tonight, Inside Edition, The Insider, Access Hollywood, and Extra, cable networks like E!, A&E Network and The Biography Channel, and numerous other television productions and thouasands of websites. Most other news media provide some coverage of celebrities and people.

Celebrity journalism differs from feature writing in that it focuses on people who are either already famous or are especially attractive, and in that it often covers celebrities obsessively, to the point of these journalists behaving unethically in order to provide coverage. Paparazzi, photographers who would follow celebrities incessantly to obtain potentially embarrassing photographs, have come to characterize celebrity journalism.

[edit] 'Convergence Journalism'

An emerging form of journalism, which combines different forms of journalism, such as print, photographic and video, into one piece or group of pieces. Convergence Journalism can be found in the likes of CNN and many other news sites. The Washington Post has a notable amount of such.

[edit] Role of journalism in society

In the 1920s, as modern journalism was just taking form, writer Walter Lippmann and American philosopher John Dewey debated over the role of journalism in a democracy. Their differing philosophies still characterize a debate about the role of journalism in society and the nation-state.

Lippmann understood that journalism's role at the time was to act as a mediator or translator between the public and policymaking elites. The journalist became the middleman. When elites spoke, journalists listened and recorded the information, distilled it, and passed it on to the public for their consumption. His reasoning behind this was that the public was not in a position to deconstruct a growing and complex flurry of information present in modern society, and so an intermediary was needed to filter news for the masses. Lippman put it this way: The public is not smart enough to understand complicated, political issues. Furthermore, the public was too consumed with their daily lives to care about complex public policy. Therefore the public needed someone to interpret the decisions or concerns of the elite to make the information plain and simple. That was the role of journalists. Lippmann believed that the public would affect the decision making of the elite with their vote. In the meantime, the elite (i.e. politicians, policy makers, bureaucrats, scientists, etc.) would keep the business of power running. In Lippman's world, the journalist's role was to inform the public of what the elites were doing. It was also to act as a watchdog over the elites as the public had the final say with their votes. Effectively that kept the public at the bottom of the power chain, catching the flow of information that is handed down from experts/elites.

Dewey, on the other hand, believed the public was not only capable of understanding the issues created or responded to by the elite, it was in the public forum that decisions should be made after discussion and debate. When issues were thoroughly vetted, then the best ideas would bubble to the surface. Dewey believed journalists not only had to inform the public, but should report on issues differently than simply passing on information. In Dewey's world, a journalist's role changed. Dewey believed that journalists should take in the information, then weigh the consequences of the policies being enacted by the elites on the public. Over time, his idea has been implemented in various degrees, and is more commonly known as "community journalism."

This concept of Community Journalism is at the center of new developments in journalism. In this new paradigm, journalists are able to engage citizens and the experts/elites in the proposition and generation of content. It's important to note that while there is an assumption of equality, Dewey still celebrates expertise. Dewey believes the shared knowledge of many is far superior to a single individual's knowledge. Experts and scholars are welcome in Dewey's framework, but there is not the hierarchical structure present in Lippman's understanding of journalism and society. According to Dewey, conversation, debate, and dialogue lie at the heart of a democracy.

While Lippman's journalistic philosophy might be more acceptable to government leaders, Dewey's approach is a better descriptor of how many journalists see their role in society, and, in turn, how much of society expects journalists to function. Americans, for example, may criticize some of the excesses committed by journalists, but they tend to expect journalists to serve as watchdogs on government, businesses and other actors, enabling people to make informed decisions on the issues of the time.

[edit] The Elements of Journalism

According to The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosensteil, there are nine elements of journalism [1]. In order for a journalist to fulfill their duty of providing the people with the information they need to be free and self-governing, they must follow these guidelines:

1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.

2. Its first loyalty is to the citizens.

3. Its essence is discipline of verification.

4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.

5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.

6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.

7. It must strive to make the significant interesting, and relevant.

8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.

9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.

On the April 2007 edition of the book [2], they have added one additional element, the rights and responsibilites of citizens to make it a total of ten elements of journalism.

[edit] Professional and ethical standards

Since the development of professional journalism at the beginning of the 20th Century, journalists have been expected to follow a stringent code of journalistic conduct that requires them to, among other things:

* Use original sources of information, including interviews with people directly involved in a story, original documents and other direct sources of information, whenever possible, and cite the sources of this information in reports;

o For more information on using sources, see Journalism sourcing.

* Fully attribute information gathered from other published sources, should original sources not be available (to not do so is considered plagiarism; some newspapers also note when an article uses information from previous reports);

* Use multiple original sources of information, especially if the subject of the report is controversial;

* Check every fact reported;

* Find and report every side of a story possible;

* Report without bias, illustrating many aspects of a conflict rather than siding with one;

* Approach researching and reporting a story with a balance between objectivity and skepticism.

* Use careful judgment when organizing and reporting information.

* Be careful about granting confidentiality to sources (news organizations usually have specific rules that journalists must follow concerning grants of confidentiality);

* Decline gifts or favors from any subject of a report, and avoid even the appearance of being influenced;

* Abstain from reporting or otherwise participating in the research and writing about a subject in which the journalist has a personal stake or bias that cannot be set aside.

This was in stark contrast to the media climate prior to the 20th Century, where the media market was dominated by smaller newspapers and pamphleteers who usually had an overt and often radical agenda, with no presumpton of balance or objectivity. E.g., see (1).

[edit] Recognition of excellence in journalism

There are several professional organizations, universities and foundations that recognize excellence in journalism. The Pulitzer Prize, administered by Columbia University in New York City, is awarded to newspapers, magazines and broadcast media for excellence in various kinds of journalism. The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism gives the Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Awards for excellence in radio and television journalism, and the Scripps Howard Foundation gives the National Journalism Awards in 17 categories. The Society of Professional Journalists gives the Sigma Delta Chi Award for journalism excellence. In the television industry, the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences gives awards for excellence in television journalism.

[edit] Failing to uphold standards

Such a code of conduct can, in the real world, be difficult to uphold consistently. Journalists who believe they are being fair or objective may give biased accounts -- by reporting selectively, trusting too much to anecdote, or giving a partial explanation of actions. (See Media bias.) Even in routine reporting, bias can creep into a story through a reporter's choice of facts to summarize, or through failure to check enough sources, hear and report dissenting voices, or seek fresh perspectives.

As much as reporters try to set aside their prejudices, they may simply be unaware of them. Young reporters may be blind to issues affecting the elderly. A 20-year veteran of the "police beat" may be deaf to rumors of departmental corruption. Publications marketed to affluent suburbanites may ignore urban problems. And, of course, naive or unwary reporters and editors alike may fall prey to public relations, propaganda or disinformation.

News organizations provide editors, producers or news directors whose job is to check reporters' work at various stages. But editors can get tired, lazy, complacent or biased. An editor may be blind to a favorite reporter's omissions, prejudices or fabrications. (See Jayson Blair.) Provincial editors also may be ill-equipped to weigh the perspective (or check the facts of) a correspondent reporting from a distant city or foreign country. (See News management.)

A news organization's budget inevitably reflects decision-making about what news to cover, for what audience, and in what depth. Those decisions may reflect conscious or unconscious bias. When budgets are cut, editors may sacrifice reporters in distant news bureaus, reduce the number of staff assigned to low-income areas, or wipe entire communities from the publication's zone of interest.

Publishers, owners and other corporate executives, especially advertising sales executives, can try to use their powers over journalists to influence how news is reported and published. Journalists usually rely on top management to create and maintain a "firewall" between the news and other departments in a news organization to prevent undue influence on the news department. One journalism magazine, Columbia Journalism Review, has made it a practice to reveal examples of executives who try to influence news coverage, of executives who do not abuse their powers over journalists, and of journalists who resist such pressures.

Self-censorship is a growing problem in journalism, particularly in covering countries that sharply restrict press freedom. As commercial pressure in the media marketplace grows, media organizations are loath to lose access to high-profile countries by producing unflattering stories. For example, CNN admitted that it had practiced self-censorship in covering the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq in order to ensure continuted access after the regime had thrown out other media. CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour also complained of self-censorship during the invasion of Iraq due to the fear of alienating key audiences in the US. There are claims that the media are also avoiding covering stories about repression and human rights violations by the Iranian regime in order to maintain a presence in the country.

[edit] Reporting versus editorializing

Generally, publishers and consumers of journalism draw a distinction between reporting — "just the facts" — and opinion writing, often by restricting opinion columns to the editorial page and its facing or "op-ed" (opposite the editorials) page. Unsigned editorials are traditionally the official opinions of the paper's editorial board, while op-ed pages may be a mixture of syndicated columns and other contributions, frequently with some attempt to balance the voices across some political or social spectrum.

The distinction between reporting and opinion can break down. Complex stories often require summarizing and interpretation of facts, especially if there is limited time or space for a story. Stories involving great amounts of interpretation are often labelled "news analysis," but still run in a paper's news columns. The limited time for each story in a broadcast report rarely allows for such distinctions.

[edit] Ambush journalism

Ambush journalism refers to aggressive tactics practiced by journalists to suddenly confront with questions people who otherwise do not wish to speak to a journalist. The practice has particularly been applied by television journalists, such as those on the CBS-TV news show 60 Minutes and by Geraldo Rivera, currently on the Fox News cable channel, and by hundreds of American local television reporters conducting investigations.

The practice has been sharply criticized by journalists and others as being highly unethical and sensational, while others defend it as the only way to attempt to provide those subject to it an opportunity to comment for a report. Ambush journalism has not been ruled illegal in the United States, although doing it on private property could open a journalist to being charged with trespassing.

[edit] Gotcha journalism

* For more information, see Gotcha journalism.

Gotcha journalism refers to the deliberate manipulation of the presentation of facts in a report in order to portray a person or organization in a particular way that varies from an accurate portrayal based on balanced review of the facts available. In particular it is applied to broadcast journalism, where the story, images and interviews are tailored to create a particular impression of the subject matter.

It is considered highly unethical to engage in gotcha journalism. Many subjects of reporting have claimed to have been subjected to it, and some media outlets are guilty of deliberately biased reporting.

[edit] Legal status

For more information, see Freedom of the press

Journalists around the world often write about the governments in their nations, and those governments have widely varying policies and practices towards journalists, which control what they can research and write, and what press organizations can publish. Many Western governments guarantee the freedom of the press, and do relatively little to restrict press rights and freedoms, while other nations severely restrict what journalists can research and/or publish.

Journalists in many nations have enjoyed some privileges not enjoyed by members of the general public, including better access to public events, crime scenes and press conferences, and to extended interviews with public officials, celebrities and others in the public eye. These privileges are available because of the perceived power of the press to turn public opinion for or against governments, their officials and policies, as well as the perception that the press often represents their consumers. These privileges extend from the legal rights of journalists but are not guaranteed by those rights. Sometimes government officials may attempt to punish individual journalists who irk them by denying them some of these privileges extended to other journalists.

Nations or jurisdictions that formally license journalists may confer special privileges and responsibilities along with those licenses, but in the United States the tradition of an independent press has avoided any imposition of government-controlled examinations or licensing.[citation needed] Some of the states have explicit shield laws that protect journalists from some forms of government inquiry, but those statutes' definitions of "journalist" were often based on access to printing presses and broadcast towers. A national shield law has been proposed.

In some nations, journalists are directly employed, controlled or censored by their governments. In other nations, governments who may claim to guarantee press rights actually intimidate journalists with threats of arrest, destruction or seizure of property (especially the means of production and dissemination of news content), torture or murder.

Journalists who elect to cover conflicts, whether wars between nations or insurgencies within nations, often give up expectation to protection by government, if not giving up their rights to protection by government. Journalists who are captured or detained during a conflict are expected to be treated as civilians and to be released to their national government.

[edit] Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

Journalists enjoy similar powers and privileges as private citizens and organizations. The power of journalists over private citizens is limited by the citizen's rights to privacy. Many who seek favorable representation in the press (celebrities, for example) do grant journalists greater access than others enjoy. The right to privacy of a private citizen may be reduced or lost if the citizen is thrust into the public eye, either by their own actions or because they are involved in a public event or incident.

Citizens and private organizations can refuse to deal with some or all journalists; the powers the press enjoy in many nations often make this tactic ineffective or counter-productive.

Citizens in most nations also enjoy the right against being libeled or defamed by journalists, and citizens can bring suit against journalists who they claim have published damaging untruths about them with malicious disregard for the truth. Libel or defamation lawsuits can also become conflicts between the journalists' rights to publish versus the private citizen's right to privacy. Some journalists have claimed lawsuits brought against them and news organizations — or even the threat of such a lawsuit — were intended to stifle their voices with the threat of expensive legal procedings, even if plaintiffs cannot prove their cases. This is referred to as the Chilling effect.

In the United Kingdom, it is up to the journalist and/or their employers to defend against claims of defamation, opposed to other nations where the burden of proof is on the claimant.

In many nations, journalists and news organizations must function under similar threat of retaliation from private individuals or organizations as from governments. Criminals and criminal organizations, political parties, some zealous religious organizations, and even mobs of people have been known to punish journalists who speak or write about them in ways they do not like. Punishments can include threats, physical damage to property, assault, torture and murder.

[edit] Right to protect confidentiality of sources

For more information, see Protection of sources

Journalists' interaction with sources sometimes involves confidentiality, an extension of freedom of the press giving journalists a legal protection to keep the identity of a source private even when demanded by police or prosecutors; withholding sources can land journalists in contempt of court, or jailtime.

The scope of rights granted journalists varies from nation to nation; in the United Kingdom, for example, the government has had more legal rights to protect what it considers sensitive information, and to force journalists to reveal the sources of leaked information, than the United States. Other nations, particularly Zimbabwe and the People's Republic of China, have a reputation of persecuting journalists, both domestic and foreign.

In the United States, there has never been a right to protect sources in federal court. Some states provide varying degrees of such protection. However, federal courts will refuse to force journalists to reveal sources, unless the information the court seeks is highly relevant to the case, and there's no other way to get it. Journalists, like all citizens, who refuse to testify even when ordered to can be found in contempt of court and fined or jailed.

[edit] Right of access to government information

Like sources, journalists depend on the rights granted by government to the public and, by extension, to the press, for access to information held by the government. These rights also vary from nation to nation (see Freedom of information legislation) and, in the United States, from state to state. Some states have more open policies for making information available, and some states have acted in the last decade to broaden those rights. New Jersey, for example, has updated and broadened its Sunshine Law to better define what kinds of government documents can be withheld from public inquiry.

In the United States, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guarantees journalists the right to obtain copies of government documents, although the government has the right to redact, or black out, information from documents in those copies that FOIA allows them to withhold. Other federal legislation also controls access to information (see Freedom of information in the United States).

[edit] See also

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Journalism

Wikibooks

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of

How To Run A Newspaper

Wikiversity

At Wikiversity you can learn more and teach others about Journalism at:

The School of Journalism

Wikinews

Wikinews has related news:

Journalism

Journalism Portal

* History of Journalism

* History of American Newspapers

* Yellow journalism

* Fashion journalism

* Sports journalism

* Parachute journalism

* Journalism in Australia

* Journalism education

* Online Journalism

* Community journalism

* Reporters without borders

* Citizen journalism

* Advocacy journalism

* Environmental journalism

* Science journalism

* Video journalism

* Objectivity (philosophy) main article discussing the concept of objectivity in various fields (history, science, journalism, philosophy, etc.)

* Objectivity (journalism)

* Journalism ethics and standards

* Freedom of the press

* Journalist

* Magazine

* Mass media

* Newspaper

* Journalism school

* Pen & Pencil Club

[edit] External links

* Wikia has a wiki about this topic: journalism

* Society of Professional Journalists

* Journalism.org: Research, Resources and Ideas to Improve Journalism

* U of Iowa: Journalism and Mass Communication Resources

* American Journalism Review magazine

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism"

Categories: Articles with limited geographic scope | USA-centric | Articles with unsourced statements since June 2007 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since July 2007 | Journalism

Interesting...

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Jesus Keys.

 

[On The Rocks]

So no Roman Catholics are bothered by the fact that the bishops have tied their salvation to how they vote?

Baptists have been doing it for decades...

Oh really? Link?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Who could have possibly predicted that this thread would veer off the tracks? Now I've seen everything.

 

[[icon]]

CrossEyed:

Question for Roman Catholics

This won't end well.

Has anybody mentioned yet that the prospects of this thread blossoming into something constructive appear dim?

Big fan of Friday coming early btw.

Journalism is a discipline of gathering, writing and reporting news, and broadly it includes the process of editing and presenting the news articles. Journalism applies to various media, but not limited to newspapers, magazines, radio, and television.

While under pressure to be the first to publish their stories, news media organizations each adhere to its own standards of accuracy, quality, and style—usually editing and proofreading their reports prior to publication. Many news organizations claim proud traditions of holding government officials and institutions accountable to the public, while media critics have raised questions on the press accountability itself.

The word journalism is taken from French journal which in turn comes from Latin term diurnal or daily; The Acta Diurna a handwritten bulletin is put up daily in forum, the main public square in ancient Rome, was the world's first newspaper.

The digitalization of news production and the diffusion capabilities of the internet are challenging the traditional journalistic professional culture. The concept of participatory or (citizen journalism) proposes that amateur reporters can actually produce their own stories either inside or outside professional media outlets.

News-oriented journalism was described by former Washington Post editor, Phil Graham, as "a first rough draft of history", because journalists often record important historical events as they are happening, but just the same, they must produce their news articles on short deadlines.

Reporting Journalism's activities include stating what, when, where, how, why famously quoted by Rudyard Kipling (see the Five Ws), and stating the significance and effects of certain events or trends. Journalism exists in a number of media: newspapers, television , radio ,magazines and, most recently, the World Wide Web through the Internet.

Journalists report and write on a wide variety of subjects: politics on the international, national, provincial and local levels, economics and business on the same four levels, health and medicine, education, sports, hobbies and recreation, lifestyles, clothing, food, pets, and relationships; journalists report on anything that news organizations think consumers will read. Journalists can report for general interest news outlets like newspapers, news magazines and broadcast sources; general circulation specialty publications like trade and hobby magazines or for news publications and outlets with a select group of subscribers. Journalists are usually expected and required to go out to the scene of a story to gather information for their reports, and often may compose their reports in the field. They also use the telephone, the computer and the internet to gather information. However, more often those reports are written, and they are almost always edited in newsrooms, the offices where journalists and editors work together to prepare news content.

Journalists, especially if they cover a specific subject or area (a 'beat') are expected to cultivate sources, people in the subject or area, that they can communicate with, either to explain the details of a story, or to provide leads to other subjects of stories yet to be reported. They are also expected to develop their investigative skills to better research and report stories. Print journalism For more information about writing a news story, see News style

Print journalism can be split into several categories: newspapers, news magazines, general interest magazines, trade magazines, hobby magazines, newsletters, private publications, online news pages and others. Each genre can have its own requirements for researching and writing reports.

For example, newspaper journalists in the United States have traditionally written reports using the inverted pyramid style, although this style is used more for straight or hard news reports rather than features. Written hard news reports are expected to be spare in the use of words, and to list the most important information first, so that, if the story must be cut because there is not enough space for it, the least important facts will be automatically removed. Editors usually ensure that reports are written with as few words as possible. Feature stories are usually written in a looser style that usually depends on the subject matter of the report, and in general granted more space (see Feature-writing below).

News magazine and general interest magazine articles are usually written in different styles, with less emphasis on the inverted pyramid. Trade publications can be more news-oriented, while hobby publications can be more feature-oriented.

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Broadcast journalism

* 2 On-line (Cyber) journalism

* 3 Variations of journalism

o 3.1 Sports journalism

o 3.2 Science journalism

o 3.3 Investigative journalism

o 3.4 New journalism

o 3.5 Gonzo journalism

o 3.6 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

o 3.7 'Convergence Journalism'

* 4 Role of journalism in society

o 4.1 The Elements of Journalism

* 5 Professional and ethical standards

o 5.1 Recognition of excellence in journalism

o 5.2 Failing to uphold standards

o 5.3 Reporting versus editorializing

o 5.4 Ambush journalism

o 5.5 Gotcha journalism

* 6 Legal status

o 6.1 Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

o 6.2 Right to protect confidentiality of sources

o 6.3 Right of access to government information

* 7 See also

* 8 External links

[edit] Broadcast journalism

For more information about radio and television journalism, see News broadcasting

Radio journalists must gather facts to present them fairly and accurately, but also must find and record relevant and interesting sounds to add to their reports, both interviews with people involved in the story and background sounds that help characterize the story. Radio reporters may also write the introduction to the story read by a radio news anchor, and may also answer questions live from the anchor.

Television journalists rely on visual information to illustrate and characterize their reporting, including on-camera interviews with people involved in the story, shots of the scene where the story took place, and graphics usually produced at the station to help frame the story. Like radio reporters, television reporters also may write the introductory script that a television news anchor would read to set up their story. Both radio and television journalists usually do not have as much "space" to present information in their reports as print journalists. Television Journalists have to be well presented and well prepared.

[edit] On-line (Cyber) journalism

The growth of the Internet and World Wide Web has spawned the newest medium for journalism, on-line (Cyber) journalism. The speed at which news can be disseminated on the web, and the profound penetration to anyone with a computer and web browser, have greatly increased the quantity and variety of news reports available to the average web user.

The bulk of on-line journalism has been the extension of existing print and broadcast media into the web via web versions of their primary products. New reports that were set to be released at expected times now can be published as soon as they are written and edited, increasing the deadline pressure and fear of being scooped many journalists must deal with.

Most news websites are free to their users — one notable exception being the Wall Street Journal website, for which a subscription is required to view its contents — but some outlets, such as the New York Times website, offer current news for free but archived reports and access to opinion columnists and other non-news sections for a periodic fee. Attempts to start unique web publications, such as Slate and Salon, have met with limited success, in part because they do or did charge subscription fees.

Many newspapers are branching into new mediums because of the Internet. Their websites may now include video, podcasts, blogs and slide-shows. Story chat, where readers may post comments on an article, has changed the dialogue newspapers foster. Traditionally kept to the confines of the opinion section as letters to the editor, story chat has allowed readers to express opinions without the time delay of a letter or the approval of an editor.

The growth of blogs as a source of news and especially opinion on the news has forever changed journalism. Blogs now can create news as well as report it, and blur the dividing line between news and opinion. The debate about whether blogging is really journalism rages on.

[edit] Variations of journalism

Newspapers and periodicals often contain features (see under heading feature style at article news style) written by journalists, many of whom specialize in this form of in-depth journalism.

Feature articles usually are longer than straight news articles, and are combined with photographs, drawings or other "art." They may also be highlighted by typographic effects or colors.

Writing features can be more demanding than writing straight news stories, because while a journalist must apply the same amount of effort to accurately gather and report the facts of the story, the reporter must also find a creative and interesting way to write the article, especially the lead, or the first one or two paragraphs of the story. The lead must grab the reader's attention yet accurately embody the ideas of the article. Often the lead of a feature article is dictated by its subject matter. Journalists must work even harder to avoid clichéd images and words when writing the lead and the rest of the article.

In the last half of the 20th Century the line between straight news reporting and feature writing blurred as more and more journalists and publications experimented with different approaches to writing an article. Tom Wolfe, Gay Talese, Hunter S. Thompson and other journalists used many different approaches to writing news articles. Urban and alternative weekly newspapers went even further blurring the distinction, and many magazines fan more features than straight news.

Some television news shows experimented with alternative formats, and many TV shows that claimed to be news shows were not considered as such by many critics, because their content and methods did not adhere to accepted journalistic standards. National Public Radio, on the other hand, is considered a good example of a good mixture of straight news reporting, features, and combinations of the two, usually meeting standards of high quality. Other U.S. public radio news organizations have achieved similar results. A majority of newspapers still maintain a clear distinction between news and features, as do most television and radio news organizations.

[edit] Sports journalism

* For more information, see Sports journalism.

Sports journalism covers many aspects of human athletic competition, and is an integral part of most journalism products, including newspapers, magazines, and radio and television news broadcasts. While some critics don't consider sports journalism to be true journalism, the prominence of sports in Western culture has justified the attention of journalists to not just the competitive events of sports, but also to athletes and the business of sports.

Sports journalism in the United States has traditionally been written in a looser, more creative and more opinionated tone than traditional journalistic writing; the emphases on accuracy and underlying fairness is still a part of sports journalism. An emphasis on the accurate description of statistical performances of athletes is also an important part of sports journalism.

[edit] Science journalism

* For more information, see Science journalism.

Science journalism is a relatively new branch of journalism, in which journalists' reporting conveys information on science topics to the public. Science journalists must understand and interpret very detailed, technical and sometimes jargon-laden information and render it into interesting reports that are comprehensible to consumers of news media.

Scientific journalists also must choose which developments in science merit news coverage, as well as cover disputes within the scientific community with a balance of fairness to both sides but also with a devotion to the facts.

Many, but not all, journalists covering science have training in the sciences they cover, including several medical journalists who cover medicine.

[edit] Investigative journalism

* For more information, see Investigative reporting.

Investigative journalism, in which journalists investigate and expose unethical, immoral and illegal behavior by individuals, businesses and government agencies, can be complicated, time-consuming and expensive — requiring teams of journalists, months of research, interviews (sometimes repeated interviews) with numerous people, long-distance travel, computers to analyze public-record databases, or use of the company's legal staff to secure documents under freedom of information laws.

Because of its inherently confrontational nature, this kind of reporting is often the first to suffer from budget cutbacks or interference from outside the news department. Investigative reporting done poorly can also expose journalists and media organizations to negative reaction from subjects of investigations and the public, and accusations of gotcha journalism. When conducted correctly it can bring the attention of the public and government problems and conditions that the public deem need to be addressed, and can win awards and recognition to the journalists involved and the media outlet that did the reporting.

[edit] New journalism

* For more information, see New Journalism.

New Journalism was the name given to a style of 1960s and 1970s news writing and journalism which used literary techniques deemed unconventional at the time. The term was codified with its current meaning by Tom Wolfe in a 1973 collection of journalism articles.

It is typified by using certain devices of literary fiction, such as conversational speech, first-person point of view, recording everyday details and telling the story using scenes. Though it seems undisciplined at first, new journalism maintains elements of reporting including strict adherence to factual accuracy and the writer being the primary source. To get "inside the head" of a character, the journalist asks the subject what they were thinking or how they felt.

Because of its unorthodox style, new journalism is typically employed in feature writing or book-length reporting projects.

Many new journalists are also writers of fiction and prose. In addition to Wolfe, writers whose work has fallen under the title "new journalism" include Norman Mailer, Hunter S. Thompson, Joan Didion, Truman Capote, George Plimpton and Gay Talese.

[edit] Gonzo journalism

Gonzo journalism is a type of journalism popularized by the American writer Hunter S. Thompson, author of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, among other stories and books. Gonzo journalism is characterized by its punchy style, rough language, and ostensible disregard for conventional journalistic writing forms and customs. Gonzo journalism attempts to present a multi-disciplinary perspective on a particular story, drawing from popular culture, sports, political, philosophical and literary sources. Gonzo journalism has been styled eclectic or untraditional. It remains a feature of popular magazines such as Rolling Stone magazine. It has a good deal in common with new journalism and on-line journalism (see above).

[edit] 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

Another area of journalism that grew in stature in the 20th Century is 'celebrity' or 'people' journalism, which focuses on the personal lives of people, primarily celebrities, including movie and stage actors, musical artists, models and photographers, other notable people in the entertainment industry, as well as people who seek attention, such as politicians, and people thrust into the attention of the public, such as people who do something newsworthy.

Once the province of newspaper gossip columnists and gossip magazines, celebrity journalism has become the focus of national tabloid newspapers like the National Enquirer, magazines like People and Us Weekly, syndicated television shows like Entertainment Tonight, Inside Edition, The Insider, Access Hollywood, and Extra, cable networks like E!, A&E Network and The Biography Channel, and numerous other television productions and thouasands of websites. Most other news media provide some coverage of celebrities and people.

Celebrity journalism differs from feature writing in that it focuses on people who are either already famous or are especially attractive, and in that it often covers celebrities obsessively, to the point of these journalists behaving unethically in order to provide coverage. Paparazzi, photographers who would follow celebrities incessantly to obtain potentially embarrassing photographs, have come to characterize celebrity journalism.

[edit] 'Convergence Journalism'

An emerging form of journalism, which combines different forms of journalism, such as print, photographic and video, into one piece or group of pieces. Convergence Journalism can be found in the likes of CNN and many other news sites. The Washington Post has a notable amount of such.

[edit] Role of journalism in society

In the 1920s, as modern journalism was just taking form, writer Walter Lippmann and American philosopher John Dewey debated over the role of journalism in a democracy. Their differing philosophies still characterize a debate about the role of journalism in society and the nation-state.

Lippmann understood that journalism's role at the time was to act as a mediator or translator between the public and policymaking elites. The journalist became the middleman. When elites spoke, journalists listened and recorded the information, distilled it, and passed it on to the public for their consumption. His reasoning behind this was that the public was not in a position to deconstruct a growing and complex flurry of information present in modern society, and so an intermediary was needed to filter news for the masses. Lippman put it this way: The public is not smart enough to understand complicated, political issues. Furthermore, the public was too consumed with their daily lives to care about complex public policy. Therefore the public needed someone to interpret the decisions or concerns of the elite to make the information plain and simple. That was the role of journalists. Lippmann believed that the public would affect the decision making of the elite with their vote. In the meantime, the elite (i.e. politicians, policy makers, bureaucrats, scientists, etc.) would keep the business of power running. In Lippman's world, the journalist's role was to inform the public of what the elites were doing. It was also to act as a watchdog over the elites as the public had the final say with their votes. Effectively that kept the public at the bottom of the power chain, catching the flow of information that is handed down from experts/elites.

Dewey, on the other hand, believed the public was not only capable of understanding the issues created or responded to by the elite, it was in the public forum that decisions should be made after discussion and debate. When issues were thoroughly vetted, then the best ideas would bubble to the surface. Dewey believed journalists not only had to inform the public, but should report on issues differently than simply passing on information. In Dewey's world, a journalist's role changed. Dewey believed that journalists should take in the information, then weigh the consequences of the policies being enacted by the elites on the public. Over time, his idea has been implemented in various degrees, and is more commonly known as "community journalism."

This concept of Community Journalism is at the center of new developments in journalism. In this new paradigm, journalists are able to engage citizens and the experts/elites in the proposition and generation of content. It's important to note that while there is an assumption of equality, Dewey still celebrates expertise. Dewey believes the shared knowledge of many is far superior to a single individual's knowledge. Experts and scholars are welcome in Dewey's framework, but there is not the hierarchical structure present in Lippman's understanding of journalism and society. According to Dewey, conversation, debate, and dialogue lie at the heart of a democracy.

While Lippman's journalistic philosophy might be more acceptable to government leaders, Dewey's approach is a better descriptor of how many journalists see their role in society, and, in turn, how much of society expects journalists to function. Americans, for example, may criticize some of the excesses committed by journalists, but they tend to expect journalists to serve as watchdogs on government, businesses and other actors, enabling people to make informed decisions on the issues of the time.

[edit] The Elements of Journalism

According to The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosensteil, there are nine elements of journalism [1]. In order for a journalist to fulfill their duty of providing the people with the information they need to be free and self-governing, they must follow these guidelines:

1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.

2. Its first loyalty is to the citizens.

3. Its essence is discipline of verification.

4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.

5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.

6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.

7. It must strive to make the significant interesting, and relevant.

8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.

9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.

On the April 2007 edition of the book [2], they have added one additional element, the rights and responsibilites of citizens to make it a total of ten elements of journalism.

[edit] Professional and ethical standards

Since the development of professional journalism at the beginning of the 20th Century, journalists have been expected to follow a stringent code of journalistic conduct that requires them to, among other things:

* Use original sources of information, including interviews with people directly involved in a story, original documents and other direct sources of information, whenever possible, and cite the sources of this information in reports;

o For more information on using sources, see Journalism sourcing.

* Fully attribute information gathered from other published sources, should original sources not be available (to not do so is considered plagiarism; some newspapers also note when an article uses information from previous reports);

* Use multiple original sources of information, especially if the subject of the report is controversial;

* Check every fact reported;

* Find and report every side of a story possible;

* Report without bias, illustrating many aspects of a conflict rather than siding with one;

* Approach researching and reporting a story with a balance between objectivity and skepticism.

* Use careful judgment when organizing and reporting information.

* Be careful about granting confidentiality to sources (news organizations usually have specific rules that journalists must follow concerning grants of confidentiality);

* Decline gifts or favors from any subject of a report, and avoid even the appearance of being influenced;

* Abstain from reporting or otherwise participating in the research and writing about a subject in which the journalist has a personal stake or bias that cannot be set aside.

This was in stark contrast to the media climate prior to the 20th Century, where the media market was dominated by smaller newspapers and pamphleteers who usually had an overt and often radical agenda, with no presumpton of balance or objectivity. E.g., see (1).

[edit] Recognition of excellence in journalism

There are several professional organizations, universities and foundations that recognize excellence in journalism. The Pulitzer Prize, administered by Columbia University in New York City, is awarded to newspapers, magazines and broadcast media for excellence in various kinds of journalism. The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism gives the Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Awards for excellence in radio and television journalism, and the Scripps Howard Foundation gives the National Journalism Awards in 17 categories. The Society of Professional Journalists gives the Sigma Delta Chi Award for journalism excellence. In the television industry, the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences gives awards for excellence in television journalism.

[edit] Failing to uphold standards

Such a code of conduct can, in the real world, be difficult to uphold consistently. Journalists who believe they are being fair or objective may give biased accounts -- by reporting selectively, trusting too much to anecdote, or giving a partial explanation of actions. (See Media bias.) Even in routine reporting, bias can creep into a story through a reporter's choice of facts to summarize, or through failure to check enough sources, hear and report dissenting voices, or seek fresh perspectives.

As much as reporters try to set aside their prejudices, they may simply be unaware of them. Young reporters may be blind to issues affecting the elderly. A 20-year veteran of the "police beat" may be deaf to rumors of departmental corruption. Publications marketed to affluent suburbanites may ignore urban problems. And, of course, naive or unwary reporters and editors alike may fall prey to public relations, propaganda or disinformation.

News organizations provide editors, producers or news directors whose job is to check reporters' work at various stages. But editors can get tired, lazy, complacent or biased. An editor may be blind to a favorite reporter's omissions, prejudices or fabrications. (See Jayson Blair.) Provincial editors also may be ill-equipped to weigh the perspective (or check the facts of) a correspondent reporting from a distant city or foreign country. (See News management.)

A news organization's budget inevitably reflects decision-making about what news to cover, for what audience, and in what depth. Those decisions may reflect conscious or unconscious bias. When budgets are cut, editors may sacrifice reporters in distant news bureaus, reduce the number of staff assigned to low-income areas, or wipe entire communities from the publication's zone of interest.

Publishers, owners and other corporate executives, especially advertising sales executives, can try to use their powers over journalists to influence how news is reported and published. Journalists usually rely on top management to create and maintain a "firewall" between the news and other departments in a news organization to prevent undue influence on the news department. One journalism magazine, Columbia Journalism Review, has made it a practice to reveal examples of executives who try to influence news coverage, of executives who do not abuse their powers over journalists, and of journalists who resist such pressures.

Self-censorship is a growing problem in journalism, particularly in covering countries that sharply restrict press freedom. As commercial pressure in the media marketplace grows, media organizations are loath to lose access to high-profile countries by producing unflattering stories. For example, CNN admitted that it had practiced self-censorship in covering the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq in order to ensure continuted access after the regime had thrown out other media. CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour also complained of self-censorship during the invasion of Iraq due to the fear of alienating key audiences in the US. There are claims that the media are also avoiding covering stories about repression and human rights violations by the Iranian regime in order to maintain a presence in the country.

[edit] Reporting versus editorializing

Generally, publishers and consumers of journalism draw a distinction between reporting — "just the facts" — and opinion writing, often by restricting opinion columns to the editorial page and its facing or "op-ed" (opposite the editorials) page. Unsigned editorials are traditionally the official opinions of the paper's editorial board, while op-ed pages may be a mixture of syndicated columns and other contributions, frequently with some attempt to balance the voices across some political or social spectrum.

The distinction between reporting and opinion can break down. Complex stories often require summarizing and interpretation of facts, especially if there is limited time or space for a story. Stories involving great amounts of interpretation are often labelled "news analysis," but still run in a paper's news columns. The limited time for each story in a broadcast report rarely allows for such distinctions.

[edit] Ambush journalism

Ambush journalism refers to aggressive tactics practiced by journalists to suddenly confront with questions people who otherwise do not wish to speak to a journalist. The practice has particularly been applied by television journalists, such as those on the CBS-TV news show 60 Minutes and by Geraldo Rivera, currently on the Fox News cable channel, and by hundreds of American local television reporters conducting investigations.

The practice has been sharply criticized by journalists and others as being highly unethical and sensational, while others defend it as the only way to attempt to provide those subject to it an opportunity to comment for a report. Ambush journalism has not been ruled illegal in the United States, although doing it on private property could open a journalist to being charged with trespassing.

[edit] Gotcha journalism

* For more information, see Gotcha journalism.

Gotcha journalism refers to the deliberate manipulation of the presentation of facts in a report in order to portray a person or organization in a particular way that varies from an accurate portrayal based on balanced review of the facts available. In particular it is applied to broadcast journalism, where the story, images and interviews are tailored to create a particular impression of the subject matter.

It is considered highly unethical to engage in gotcha journalism. Many subjects of reporting have claimed to have been subjected to it, and some media outlets are guilty of deliberately biased reporting.

[edit] Legal status

For more information, see Freedom of the press

Journalists around the world often write about the governments in their nations, and those governments have widely varying policies and practices towards journalists, which control what they can research and write, and what press organizations can publish. Many Western governments guarantee the freedom of the press, and do relatively little to restrict press rights and freedoms, while other nations severely restrict what journalists can research and/or publish.

Journalists in many nations have enjoyed some privileges not enjoyed by members of the general public, including better access to public events, crime scenes and press conferences, and to extended interviews with public officials, celebrities and others in the public eye. These privileges are available because of the perceived power of the press to turn public opinion for or against governments, their officials and policies, as well as the perception that the press often represents their consumers. These privileges extend from the legal rights of journalists but are not guaranteed by those rights. Sometimes government officials may attempt to punish individual journalists who irk them by denying them some of these privileges extended to other journalists.

Nations or jurisdictions that formally license journalists may confer special privileges and responsibilities along with those licenses, but in the United States the tradition of an independent press has avoided any imposition of government-controlled examinations or licensing.[citation needed] Some of the states have explicit shield laws that protect journalists from some forms of government inquiry, but those statutes' definitions of "journalist" were often based on access to printing presses and broadcast towers. A national shield law has been proposed.

In some nations, journalists are directly employed, controlled or censored by their governments. In other nations, governments who may claim to guarantee press rights actually intimidate journalists with threats of arrest, destruction or seizure of property (especially the means of production and dissemination of news content), torture or murder.

Journalists who elect to cover conflicts, whether wars between nations or insurgencies within nations, often give up expectation to protection by government, if not giving up their rights to protection by government. Journalists who are captured or detained during a conflict are expected to be treated as civilians and to be released to their national government.

[edit] Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

Journalists enjoy similar powers and privileges as private citizens and organizations. The power of journalists over private citizens is limited by the citizen's rights to privacy. Many who seek favorable representation in the press (celebrities, for example) do grant journalists greater access than others enjoy. The right to privacy of a private citizen may be reduced or lost if the citizen is thrust into the public eye, either by their own actions or because they are involved in a public event or incident.

Citizens and private organizations can refuse to deal with some or all journalists; the powers the press enjoy in many nations often make this tactic ineffective or counter-productive.

Citizens in most nations also enjoy the right against being libeled or defamed by journalists, and citizens can bring suit against journalists who they claim have published damaging untruths about them with malicious disregard for the truth. Libel or defamation lawsuits can also become conflicts between the journalists' rights to publish versus the private citizen's right to privacy. Some journalists have claimed lawsuits brought against them and news organizations — or even the threat of such a lawsuit — were intended to stifle their voices with the threat of expensive legal procedings, even if plaintiffs cannot prove their cases. This is referred to as the Chilling effect.

In the United Kingdom, it is up to the journalist and/or their employers to defend against claims of defamation, opposed to other nations where the burden of proof is on the claimant.

In many nations, journalists and news organizations must function under similar threat of retaliation from private individuals or organizations as from governments. Criminals and criminal organizations, political parties, some zealous religious organizations, and even mobs of people have been known to punish journalists who speak or write about them in ways they do not like. Punishments can include threats, physical damage to property, assault, torture and murder.

[edit] Right to protect confidentiality of sources

For more information, see Protection of sources

Journalists' interaction with sources sometimes involves confidentiality, an extension of freedom of the press giving journalists a legal protection to keep the identity of a source private even when demanded by police or prosecutors; withholding sources can land journalists in contempt of court, or jailtime.

The scope of rights granted journalists varies from nation to nation; in the United Kingdom, for example, the government has had more legal rights to protect what it considers sensitive information, and to force journalists to reveal the sources of leaked information, than the United States. Other nations, particularly Zimbabwe and the People's Republic of China, have a reputation of persecuting journalists, both domestic and foreign.

In the United States, there has never been a right to protect sources in federal court. Some states provide varying degrees of such protection. However, federal courts will refuse to force journalists to reveal sources, unless the information the court seeks is highly relevant to the case, and there's no other way to get it. Journalists, like all citizens, who refuse to testify even when ordered to can be found in contempt of court and fined or jailed.

[edit] Right of access to government information

Like sources, journalists depend on the rights granted by government to the public and, by extension, to the press, for access to information held by the government. These rights also vary from nation to nation (see Freedom of information legislation) and, in the United States, from state to state. Some states have more open policies for making information available, and some states have acted in the last decade to broaden those rights. New Jersey, for example, has updated and broadened its Sunshine Law to better define what kinds of government documents can be withheld from public inquiry.

In the United States, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guarantees journalists the right to obtain copies of government documents, although the government has the right to redact, or black out, information from documents in those copies that FOIA allows them to withhold. Other federal legislation also controls access to information (see Freedom of information in the United States).

[edit] See also

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Journalism

Wikibooks

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of

How To Run A Newspaper

Wikiversity

At Wikiversity you can learn more and teach others about Journalism at:

The School of Journalism

Wikinews

Wikinews has related news:

Journalism

Journalism Portal

* History of Journalism

* History of American Newspapers

* Yellow journalism

* Fashion journalism

* Sports journalism

* Parachute journalism

* Journalism in Australia

* Journalism education

* Online Journalism

* Community journalism

* Reporters without borders

* Citizen journalism

* Advocacy journalism

* Environmental journalism

* Science journalism

* Video journalism

* Objectivity (philosophy) main article discussing the concept of objectivity in various fields (history, science, journalism, philosophy, etc.)

* Objectivity (journalism)

* Journalism ethics and standards

* Freedom of the press

* Journalist

* Magazine

* Mass media

* Newspaper

* Journalism school

* Pen & Pencil Club

[edit] External links

* Wikia has a wiki about this topic: journalism

* Society of Professional Journalists

* Journalism.org: Research, Resources and Ideas to Improve Journalism

* U of Iowa: Journalism and Mass Communication Resources

* American Journalism Review magazine

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism"

Categories: Articles with limited geographic scope | USA-centric | Articles with unsourced statements since June 2007 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since July 2007 | Journalism

This is so my head wants to explode.

 

[CrossEyed]

As a pastor, I would never have the arrogance to tell someone how they should vote. That's an individual decision. But to tie their salvation to their vote is especially troubling to me.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Journalism is a discipline of gathering, writing and reporting news, and broadly it includes the process of editing and presenting the news articles. Journalism applies to various media, but not limited to newspapers, magazines, radio, and television.

While under pressure to be the first to publish their stories, news media organizations each adhere to its own standards of accuracy, quality, and style—usually editing and proofreading their reports prior to publication. Many news organizations claim proud traditions of holding government officials and institutions accountable to the public, while media critics have raised questions on the press accountability itself.

The word journalism is taken from French journal which in turn comes from Latin term diurnal or daily; The Acta Diurna a handwritten bulletin is put up daily in forum, the main public square in ancient Rome, was the world's first newspaper.

The digitalization of news production and the diffusion capabilities of the internet are challenging the traditional journalistic professional culture. The concept of participatory or (citizen journalism) proposes that amateur reporters can actually produce their own stories either inside or outside professional media outlets.

News-oriented journalism was described by former Washington Post editor, Phil Graham, as "a first rough draft of history", because journalists often record important historical events as they are happening, but just the same, they must produce their news articles on short deadlines.

Reporting Journalism's activities include stating what, when, where, how, why famously quoted by Rudyard Kipling (see the Five Ws), and stating the significance and effects of certain events or trends. Journalism exists in a number of media: newspapers, television , radio ,magazines and, most recently, the World Wide Web through the Internet.

Journalists report and write on a wide variety of subjects: politics on the international, national, provincial and local levels, economics and business on the same four levels, health and medicine, education, sports, hobbies and recreation, lifestyles, clothing, food, pets, and relationships; journalists report on anything that news organizations think consumers will read. Journalists can report for general interest news outlets like newspapers, news magazines and broadcast sources; general circulation specialty publications like trade and hobby magazines or for news publications and outlets with a select group of subscribers. Journalists are usually expected and required to go out to the scene of a story to gather information for their reports, and often may compose their reports in the field. They also use the telephone, the computer and the internet to gather information. However, more often those reports are written, and they are almost always edited in newsrooms, the offices where journalists and editors work together to prepare news content.

Journalists, especially if they cover a specific subject or area (a 'beat') are expected to cultivate sources, people in the subject or area, that they can communicate with, either to explain the details of a story, or to provide leads to other subjects of stories yet to be reported. They are also expected to develop their investigative skills to better research and report stories. Print journalism For more information about writing a news story, see News style

Print journalism can be split into several categories: newspapers, news magazines, general interest magazines, trade magazines, hobby magazines, newsletters, private publications, online news pages and others. Each genre can have its own requirements for researching and writing reports.

For example, newspaper journalists in the United States have traditionally written reports using the inverted pyramid style, although this style is used more for straight or hard news reports rather than features. Written hard news reports are expected to be spare in the use of words, and to list the most important information first, so that, if the story must be cut because there is not enough space for it, the least important facts will be automatically removed. Editors usually ensure that reports are written with as few words as possible. Feature stories are usually written in a looser style that usually depends on the subject matter of the report, and in general granted more space (see Feature-writing below).

News magazine and general interest magazine articles are usually written in different styles, with less emphasis on the inverted pyramid. Trade publications can be more news-oriented, while hobby publications can be more feature-oriented.

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Broadcast journalism

* 2 On-line (Cyber) journalism

* 3 Variations of journalism

o 3.1 Sports journalism

o 3.2 Science journalism

o 3.3 Investigative journalism

o 3.4 New journalism

o 3.5 Gonzo journalism

o 3.6 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

o 3.7 'Convergence Journalism'

* 4 Role of journalism in society

o 4.1 The Elements of Journalism

* 5 Professional and ethical standards

o 5.1 Recognition of excellence in journalism

o 5.2 Failing to uphold standards

o 5.3 Reporting versus editorializing

o 5.4 Ambush journalism

o 5.5 Gotcha journalism

* 6 Legal status

o 6.1 Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

o 6.2 Right to protect confidentiality of sources

o 6.3 Right of access to government information

* 7 See also

* 8 External links

[edit] Broadcast journalism

For more information about radio and television journalism, see News broadcasting

Radio journalists must gather facts to present them fairly and accurately, but also must find and record relevant and interesting sounds to add to their reports, both interviews with people involved in the story and background sounds that help characterize the story. Radio reporters may also write the introduction to the story read by a radio news anchor, and may also answer questions live from the anchor.

Television journalists rely on visual information to illustrate and characterize their reporting, including on-camera interviews with people involved in the story, shots of the scene where the story took place, and graphics usually produced at the station to help frame the story. Like radio reporters, television reporters also may write the introductory script that a television news anchor would read to set up their story. Both radio and television journalists usually do not have as much "space" to present information in their reports as print journalists. Television Journalists have to be well presented and well prepared.

[edit] On-line (Cyber) journalism

The growth of the Internet and World Wide Web has spawned the newest medium for journalism, on-line (Cyber) journalism. The speed at which news can be disseminated on the web, and the profound penetration to anyone with a computer and web browser, have greatly increased the quantity and variety of news reports available to the average web user.

The bulk of on-line journalism has been the extension of existing print and broadcast media into the web via web versions of their primary products. New reports that were set to be released at expected times now can be published as soon as they are written and edited, increasing the deadline pressure and fear of being scooped many journalists must deal with.

Most news websites are free to their users — one notable exception being the Wall Street Journal website, for which a subscription is required to view its contents — but some outlets, such as the New York Times website, offer current news for free but archived reports and access to opinion columnists and other non-news sections for a periodic fee. Attempts to start unique web publications, such as Slate and Salon, have met with limited success, in part because they do or did charge subscription fees.

Many newspapers are branching into new mediums because of the Internet. Their websites may now include video, podcasts, blogs and slide-shows. Story chat, where readers may post comments on an article, has changed the dialogue newspapers foster. Traditionally kept to the confines of the opinion section as letters to the editor, story chat has allowed readers to express opinions without the time delay of a letter or the approval of an editor.

The growth of blogs as a source of news and especially opinion on the news has forever changed journalism. Blogs now can create news as well as report it, and blur the dividing line between news and opinion. The debate about whether blogging is really journalism rages on.

[edit] Variations of journalism

Newspapers and periodicals often contain features (see under heading feature style at article news style) written by journalists, many of whom specialize in this form of in-depth journalism.

Feature articles usually are longer than straight news articles, and are combined with photographs, drawings or other "art." They may also be highlighted by typographic effects or colors.

Writing features can be more demanding than writing straight news stories, because while a journalist must apply the same amount of effort to accurately gather and report the facts of the story, the reporter must also find a creative and interesting way to write the article, especially the lead, or the first one or two paragraphs of the story. The lead must grab the reader's attention yet accurately embody the ideas of the article. Often the lead of a feature article is dictated by its subject matter. Journalists must work even harder to avoid clichéd images and words when writing the lead and the rest of the article.

In the last half of the 20th Century the line between straight news reporting and feature writing blurred as more and more journalists and publications experimented with different approaches to writing an article. Tom Wolfe, Gay Talese, Hunter S. Thompson and other journalists used many different approaches to writing news articles. Urban and alternative weekly newspapers went even further blurring the distinction, and many magazines fan more features than straight news.

Some television news shows experimented with alternative formats, and many TV shows that claimed to be news shows were not considered as such by many critics, because their content and methods did not adhere to accepted journalistic standards. National Public Radio, on the other hand, is considered a good example of a good mixture of straight news reporting, features, and combinations of the two, usually meeting standards of high quality. Other U.S. public radio news organizations have achieved similar results. A majority of newspapers still maintain a clear distinction between news and features, as do most television and radio news organizations.

[edit] Sports journalism

* For more information, see Sports journalism.

Sports journalism covers many aspects of human athletic competition, and is an integral part of most journalism products, including newspapers, magazines, and radio and television news broadcasts. While some critics don't consider sports journalism to be true journalism, the prominence of sports in Western culture has justified the attention of journalists to not just the competitive events of sports, but also to athletes and the business of sports.

Sports journalism in the United States has traditionally been written in a looser, more creative and more opinionated tone than traditional journalistic writing; the emphases on accuracy and underlying fairness is still a part of sports journalism. An emphasis on the accurate description of statistical performances of athletes is also an important part of sports journalism.

[edit] Science journalism

* For more information, see Science journalism.

Science journalism is a relatively new branch of journalism, in which journalists' reporting conveys information on science topics to the public. Science journalists must understand and interpret very detailed, technical and sometimes jargon-laden information and render it into interesting reports that are comprehensible to consumers of news media.

Scientific journalists also must choose which developments in science merit news coverage, as well as cover disputes within the scientific community with a balance of fairness to both sides but also with a devotion to the facts.

Many, but not all, journalists covering science have training in the sciences they cover, including several medical journalists who cover medicine.

[edit] Investigative journalism

* For more information, see Investigative reporting.

Investigative journalism, in which journalists investigate and expose unethical, immoral and illegal behavior by individuals, businesses and government agencies, can be complicated, time-consuming and expensive — requiring teams of journalists, months of research, interviews (sometimes repeated interviews) with numerous people, long-distance travel, computers to analyze public-record databases, or use of the company's legal staff to secure documents under freedom of information laws.

Because of its inherently confrontational nature, this kind of reporting is often the first to suffer from budget cutbacks or interference from outside the news department. Investigative reporting done poorly can also expose journalists and media organizations to negative reaction from subjects of investigations and the public, and accusations of gotcha journalism. When conducted correctly it can bring the attention of the public and government problems and conditions that the public deem need to be addressed, and can win awards and recognition to the journalists involved and the media outlet that did the reporting.

[edit] New journalism

* For more information, see New Journalism.

New Journalism was the name given to a style of 1960s and 1970s news writing and journalism which used literary techniques deemed unconventional at the time. The term was codified with its current meaning by Tom Wolfe in a 1973 collection of journalism articles.

It is typified by using certain devices of literary fiction, such as conversational speech, first-person point of view, recording everyday details and telling the story using scenes. Though it seems undisciplined at first, new journalism maintains elements of reporting including strict adherence to factual accuracy and the writer being the primary source. To get "inside the head" of a character, the journalist asks the subject what they were thinking or how they felt.

Because of its unorthodox style, new journalism is typically employed in feature writing or book-length reporting projects.

Many new journalists are also writers of fiction and prose. In addition to Wolfe, writers whose work has fallen under the title "new journalism" include Norman Mailer, Hunter S. Thompson, Joan Didion, Truman Capote, George Plimpton and Gay Talese.

[edit] Gonzo journalism

Gonzo journalism is a type of journalism popularized by the American writer Hunter S. Thompson, author of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, among other stories and books. Gonzo journalism is characterized by its punchy style, rough language, and ostensible disregard for conventional journalistic writing forms and customs. Gonzo journalism attempts to present a multi-disciplinary perspective on a particular story, drawing from popular culture, sports, political, philosophical and literary sources. Gonzo journalism has been styled eclectic or untraditional. It remains a feature of popular magazines such as Rolling Stone magazine. It has a good deal in common with new journalism and on-line journalism (see above).

[edit] 'Celebrity' or 'People' journalism

Another area of journalism that grew in stature in the 20th Century is 'celebrity' or 'people' journalism, which focuses on the personal lives of people, primarily celebrities, including movie and stage actors, musical artists, models and photographers, other notable people in the entertainment industry, as well as people who seek attention, such as politicians, and people thrust into the attention of the public, such as people who do something newsworthy.

Once the province of newspaper gossip columnists and gossip magazines, celebrity journalism has become the focus of national tabloid newspapers like the National Enquirer, magazines like People and Us Weekly, syndicated television shows like Entertainment Tonight, Inside Edition, The Insider, Access Hollywood, and Extra, cable networks like E!, A&E Network and The Biography Channel, and numerous other television productions and thouasands of websites. Most other news media provide some coverage of celebrities and people.

Celebrity journalism differs from feature writing in that it focuses on people who are either already famous or are especially attractive, and in that it often covers celebrities obsessively, to the point of these journalists behaving unethically in order to provide coverage. Paparazzi, photographers who would follow celebrities incessantly to obtain potentially embarrassing photographs, have come to characterize celebrity journalism.

[edit] 'Convergence Journalism'

An emerging form of journalism, which combines different forms of journalism, such as print, photographic and video, into one piece or group of pieces. Convergence Journalism can be found in the likes of CNN and many other news sites. The Washington Post has a notable amount of such.

[edit] Role of journalism in society

In the 1920s, as modern journalism was just taking form, writer Walter Lippmann and American philosopher John Dewey debated over the role of journalism in a democracy. Their differing philosophies still characterize a debate about the role of journalism in society and the nation-state.

Lippmann understood that journalism's role at the time was to act as a mediator or translator between the public and policymaking elites. The journalist became the middleman. When elites spoke, journalists listened and recorded the information, distilled it, and passed it on to the public for their consumption. His reasoning behind this was that the public was not in a position to deconstruct a growing and complex flurry of information present in modern society, and so an intermediary was needed to filter news for the masses. Lippman put it this way: The public is not smart enough to understand complicated, political issues. Furthermore, the public was too consumed with their daily lives to care about complex public policy. Therefore the public needed someone to interpret the decisions or concerns of the elite to make the information plain and simple. That was the role of journalists. Lippmann believed that the public would affect the decision making of the elite with their vote. In the meantime, the elite (i.e. politicians, policy makers, bureaucrats, scientists, etc.) would keep the business of power running. In Lippman's world, the journalist's role was to inform the public of what the elites were doing. It was also to act as a watchdog over the elites as the public had the final say with their votes. Effectively that kept the public at the bottom of the power chain, catching the flow of information that is handed down from experts/elites.

Dewey, on the other hand, believed the public was not only capable of understanding the issues created or responded to by the elite, it was in the public forum that decisions should be made after discussion and debate. When issues were thoroughly vetted, then the best ideas would bubble to the surface. Dewey believed journalists not only had to inform the public, but should report on issues differently than simply passing on information. In Dewey's world, a journalist's role changed. Dewey believed that journalists should take in the information, then weigh the consequences of the policies being enacted by the elites on the public. Over time, his idea has been implemented in various degrees, and is more commonly known as "community journalism."

This concept of Community Journalism is at the center of new developments in journalism. In this new paradigm, journalists are able to engage citizens and the experts/elites in the proposition and generation of content. It's important to note that while there is an assumption of equality, Dewey still celebrates expertise. Dewey believes the shared knowledge of many is far superior to a single individual's knowledge. Experts and scholars are welcome in Dewey's framework, but there is not the hierarchical structure present in Lippman's understanding of journalism and society. According to Dewey, conversation, debate, and dialogue lie at the heart of a democracy.

While Lippman's journalistic philosophy might be more acceptable to government leaders, Dewey's approach is a better descriptor of how many journalists see their role in society, and, in turn, how much of society expects journalists to function. Americans, for example, may criticize some of the excesses committed by journalists, but they tend to expect journalists to serve as watchdogs on government, businesses and other actors, enabling people to make informed decisions on the issues of the time.

[edit] The Elements of Journalism

According to The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosensteil, there are nine elements of journalism [1]. In order for a journalist to fulfill their duty of providing the people with the information they need to be free and self-governing, they must follow these guidelines:

1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.

2. Its first loyalty is to the citizens.

3. Its essence is discipline of verification.

4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.

5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.

6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.

7. It must strive to make the significant interesting, and relevant.

8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.

9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.

On the April 2007 edition of the book [2], they have added one additional element, the rights and responsibilites of citizens to make it a total of ten elements of journalism.

[edit] Professional and ethical standards

Since the development of professional journalism at the beginning of the 20th Century, journalists have been expected to follow a stringent code of journalistic conduct that requires them to, among other things:

* Use original sources of information, including interviews with people directly involved in a story, original documents and other direct sources of information, whenever possible, and cite the sources of this information in reports;

o For more information on using sources, see Journalism sourcing.

* Fully attribute information gathered from other published sources, should original sources not be available (to not do so is considered plagiarism; some newspapers also note when an article uses information from previous reports);

* Use multiple original sources of information, especially if the subject of the report is controversial;

* Check every fact reported;

* Find and report every side of a story possible;

* Report without bias, illustrating many aspects of a conflict rather than siding with one;

* Approach researching and reporting a story with a balance between objectivity and skepticism.

* Use careful judgment when organizing and reporting information.

* Be careful about granting confidentiality to sources (news organizations usually have specific rules that journalists must follow concerning grants of confidentiality);

* Decline gifts or favors from any subject of a report, and avoid even the appearance of being influenced;

* Abstain from reporting or otherwise participating in the research and writing about a subject in which the journalist has a personal stake or bias that cannot be set aside.

This was in stark contrast to the media climate prior to the 20th Century, where the media market was dominated by smaller newspapers and pamphleteers who usually had an overt and often radical agenda, with no presumpton of balance or objectivity. E.g., see (1).

[edit] Recognition of excellence in journalism

There are several professional organizations, universities and foundations that recognize excellence in journalism. The Pulitzer Prize, administered by Columbia University in New York City, is awarded to newspapers, magazines and broadcast media for excellence in various kinds of journalism. The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism gives the Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Awards for excellence in radio and television journalism, and the Scripps Howard Foundation gives the National Journalism Awards in 17 categories. The Society of Professional Journalists gives the Sigma Delta Chi Award for journalism excellence. In the television industry, the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences gives awards for excellence in television journalism.

[edit] Failing to uphold standards

Such a code of conduct can, in the real world, be difficult to uphold consistently. Journalists who believe they are being fair or objective may give biased accounts -- by reporting selectively, trusting too much to anecdote, or giving a partial explanation of actions. (See Media bias.) Even in routine reporting, bias can creep into a story through a reporter's choice of facts to summarize, or through failure to check enough sources, hear and report dissenting voices, or seek fresh perspectives.

As much as reporters try to set aside their prejudices, they may simply be unaware of them. Young reporters may be blind to issues affecting the elderly. A 20-year veteran of the "police beat" may be deaf to rumors of departmental corruption. Publications marketed to affluent suburbanites may ignore urban problems. And, of course, naive or unwary reporters and editors alike may fall prey to public relations, propaganda or disinformation.

News organizations provide editors, producers or news directors whose job is to check reporters' work at various stages. But editors can get tired, lazy, complacent or biased. An editor may be blind to a favorite reporter's omissions, prejudices or fabrications. (See Jayson Blair.) Provincial editors also may be ill-equipped to weigh the perspective (or check the facts of) a correspondent reporting from a distant city or foreign country. (See News management.)

A news organization's budget inevitably reflects decision-making about what news to cover, for what audience, and in what depth. Those decisions may reflect conscious or unconscious bias. When budgets are cut, editors may sacrifice reporters in distant news bureaus, reduce the number of staff assigned to low-income areas, or wipe entire communities from the publication's zone of interest.

Publishers, owners and other corporate executives, especially advertising sales executives, can try to use their powers over journalists to influence how news is reported and published. Journalists usually rely on top management to create and maintain a "firewall" between the news and other departments in a news organization to prevent undue influence on the news department. One journalism magazine, Columbia Journalism Review, has made it a practice to reveal examples of executives who try to influence news coverage, of executives who do not abuse their powers over journalists, and of journalists who resist such pressures.

Self-censorship is a growing problem in journalism, particularly in covering countries that sharply restrict press freedom. As commercial pressure in the media marketplace grows, media organizations are loath to lose access to high-profile countries by producing unflattering stories. For example, CNN admitted that it had practiced self-censorship in covering the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq in order to ensure continuted access after the regime had thrown out other media. CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour also complained of self-censorship during the invasion of Iraq due to the fear of alienating key audiences in the US. There are claims that the media are also avoiding covering stories about repression and human rights violations by the Iranian regime in order to maintain a presence in the country.

[edit] Reporting versus editorializing

Generally, publishers and consumers of journalism draw a distinction between reporting — "just the facts" — and opinion writing, often by restricting opinion columns to the editorial page and its facing or "op-ed" (opposite the editorials) page. Unsigned editorials are traditionally the official opinions of the paper's editorial board, while op-ed pages may be a mixture of syndicated columns and other contributions, frequently with some attempt to balance the voices across some political or social spectrum.

The distinction between reporting and opinion can break down. Complex stories often require summarizing and interpretation of facts, especially if there is limited time or space for a story. Stories involving great amounts of interpretation are often labelled "news analysis," but still run in a paper's news columns. The limited time for each story in a broadcast report rarely allows for such distinctions.

[edit] Ambush journalism

Ambush journalism refers to aggressive tactics practiced by journalists to suddenly confront with questions people who otherwise do not wish to speak to a journalist. The practice has particularly been applied by television journalists, such as those on the CBS-TV news show 60 Minutes and by Geraldo Rivera, currently on the Fox News cable channel, and by hundreds of American local television reporters conducting investigations.

The practice has been sharply criticized by journalists and others as being highly unethical and sensational, while others defend it as the only way to attempt to provide those subject to it an opportunity to comment for a report. Ambush journalism has not been ruled illegal in the United States, although doing it on private property could open a journalist to being charged with trespassing.

[edit] Gotcha journalism

* For more information, see Gotcha journalism.

Gotcha journalism refers to the deliberate manipulation of the presentation of facts in a report in order to portray a person or organization in a particular way that varies from an accurate portrayal based on balanced review of the facts available. In particular it is applied to broadcast journalism, where the story, images and interviews are tailored to create a particular impression of the subject matter.

It is considered highly unethical to engage in gotcha journalism. Many subjects of reporting have claimed to have been subjected to it, and some media outlets are guilty of deliberately biased reporting.

[edit] Legal status

For more information, see Freedom of the press

Journalists around the world often write about the governments in their nations, and those governments have widely varying policies and practices towards journalists, which control what they can research and write, and what press organizations can publish. Many Western governments guarantee the freedom of the press, and do relatively little to restrict press rights and freedoms, while other nations severely restrict what journalists can research and/or publish.

Journalists in many nations have enjoyed some privileges not enjoyed by members of the general public, including better access to public events, crime scenes and press conferences, and to extended interviews with public officials, celebrities and others in the public eye. These privileges are available because of the perceived power of the press to turn public opinion for or against governments, their officials and policies, as well as the perception that the press often represents their consumers. These privileges extend from the legal rights of journalists but are not guaranteed by those rights. Sometimes government officials may attempt to punish individual journalists who irk them by denying them some of these privileges extended to other journalists.

Nations or jurisdictions that formally license journalists may confer special privileges and responsibilities along with those licenses, but in the United States the tradition of an independent press has avoided any imposition of government-controlled examinations or licensing.[citation needed] Some of the states have explicit shield laws that protect journalists from some forms of government inquiry, but those statutes' definitions of "journalist" were often based on access to printing presses and broadcast towers. A national shield law has been proposed.

In some nations, journalists are directly employed, controlled or censored by their governments. In other nations, governments who may claim to guarantee press rights actually intimidate journalists with threats of arrest, destruction or seizure of property (especially the means of production and dissemination of news content), torture or murder.

Journalists who elect to cover conflicts, whether wars between nations or insurgencies within nations, often give up expectation to protection by government, if not giving up their rights to protection by government. Journalists who are captured or detained during a conflict are expected to be treated as civilians and to be released to their national government.

[edit] Rights of journalists versus those of private citizens and organizations

Journalists enjoy similar powers and privileges as private citizens and organizations. The power of journalists over private citizens is limited by the citizen's rights to privacy. Many who seek favorable representation in the press (celebrities, for example) do grant journalists greater access than others enjoy. The right to privacy of a private citizen may be reduced or lost if the citizen is thrust into the public eye, either by their own actions or because they are involved in a public event or incident.

Citizens and private organizations can refuse to deal with some or all journalists; the powers the press enjoy in many nations often make this tactic ineffective or counter-productive.

Citizens in most nations also enjoy the right against being libeled or defamed by journalists, and citizens can bring suit against journalists who they claim have published damaging untruths about them with malicious disregard for the truth. Libel or defamation lawsuits can also become conflicts between the journalists' rights to publish versus the private citizen's right to privacy. Some journalists have claimed lawsuits brought against them and news organizations — or even the threat of such a lawsuit — were intended to stifle their voices with the threat of expensive legal procedings, even if plaintiffs cannot prove their cases. This is referred to as the Chilling effect.

In the United Kingdom, it is up to the journalist and/or their employers to defend against claims of defamation, opposed to other nations where the burden of proof is on the claimant.

In many nations, journalists and news organizations must function under similar threat of retaliation from private individuals or organizations as from governments. Criminals and criminal organizations, political parties, some zealous religious organizations, and even mobs of people have been known to punish journalists who speak or write about them in ways they do not like. Punishments can include threats, physical damage to property, assault, torture and murder.

[edit] Right to protect confidentiality of sources

For more information, see Protection of sources

Journalists' interaction with sources sometimes involves confidentiality, an extension of freedom of the press giving journalists a legal protection to keep the identity of a source private even when demanded by police or prosecutors; withholding sources can land journalists in contempt of court, or jailtime.

The scope of rights granted journalists varies from nation to nation; in the United Kingdom, for example, the government has had more legal rights to protect what it considers sensitive information, and to force journalists to reveal the sources of leaked information, than the United States. Other nations, particularly Zimbabwe and the People's Republic of China, have a reputation of persecuting journalists, both domestic and foreign.

In the United States, there has never been a right to protect sources in federal court. Some states provide varying degrees of such protection. However, federal courts will refuse to force journalists to reveal sources, unless the information the court seeks is highly relevant to the case, and there's no other way to get it. Journalists, like all citizens, who refuse to testify even when ordered to can be found in contempt of court and fined or jailed.

[edit] Right of access to government information

Like sources, journalists depend on the rights granted by government to the public and, by extension, to the press, for access to information held by the government. These rights also vary from nation to nation (see Freedom of information legislation) and, in the United States, from state to state. Some states have more open policies for making information available, and some states have acted in the last decade to broaden those rights. New Jersey, for example, has updated and broadened its Sunshine Law to better define what kinds of government documents can be withheld from public inquiry.

In the United States, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guarantees journalists the right to obtain copies of government documents, although the government has the right to redact, or black out, information from documents in those copies that FOIA allows them to withhold. Other federal legislation also controls access to information (see Freedom of information in the United States).

[edit] See also

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Journalism

Wikibooks

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of

How To Run A Newspaper

Wikiversity

At Wikiversity you can learn more and teach others about Journalism at:

The School of Journalism

Wikinews

Wikinews has related news:

Journalism

Journalism Portal

* History of Journalism

* History of American Newspapers

* Yellow journalism

* Fashion journalism

* Sports journalism

* Parachute journalism

* Journalism in Australia

* Journalism education

* Online Journalism

* Community journalism

* Reporters without borders

* Citizen journalism

* Advocacy journalism

* Environmental journalism

* Science journalism

* Video journalism

* Objectivity (philosophy) main article discussing the concept of objectivity in various fields (history, science, journalism, philosophy, etc.)

* Objectivity (journalism)

* Journalism ethics and standards

* Freedom of the press

* Journalist

* Magazine

* Mass media

* Newspaper

* Journalism school

* Pen & Pencil Club

[edit] External links

* Wikia has a wiki about this topic: journalism

* Society of Professional Journalists

* Journalism.org: Research, Resources and Ideas to Improve Journalism

* U of Iowa: Journalism and Mass Communication Resources

* American Journalism Review magazine

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism"

Categories: Articles with limited geographic scope | USA-centric | Articles with unsourced statements since June 2007 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since July 2007 | Journalism

Interesting...

I thought so.

 

[FatMax]

As a pastor, I would never have the arrogance to tell someone how they should vote. That's an individual decision. But to tie their salvation to their vote is especially troubling to me.

My girlfriend's brother's Babtist church has the arrogance to tell people how to vote. They even let Republicans stump for candidate during their Sunday service. No joke.Edit: I don't think they tell them they are going to hell if they don't vote correcty, but I could be wrong. It's probably just implied.

 

[[icon]]

But what do you guys think of this?

Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia •

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Bible (disambiguation).

Part of a series on

The Bible

Biblical canon

* Chapters and verses of the Bible

* Hebrew Bible/Tanakh

* Torah

* Prophets

* Writings

* Old Testament

* Deuterocanonicals

* New Testament

* Antilegomena

Bible translations

* English translations of the Bible

Research

* Biblical manuscript

* Documentary hypothesis

* Biblical narratives and the Qur'an

Views

* Biblical inerrancy

* Criticism of the Bible

This box: view • talk • edit

The Bible is

* Part of Category:Judaism

(see The Hebrew Bible below)

* Part of a series on Christianity

(see The New Testament below)

The word Bible refers to the canonical collections of religious writings or books of Judaism and Christianity.[1] Books included as canon in the Bible vary according to these religious traditions and among their denominations. These variations reflect a range of histories, traditions and myths.

The Jewish version of the Bible, the Tanakh, includes the books common to both the Christian and Jewish biblical canons.[2] The Torah is traditionally considered by believers to be God's direct words and thus thought to be the most sacred part. Much of the Jewish religious law is derived from the Torah.

The Christian version of the Bible is often called the Holy Bible, Scriptures, or Word of God. It divides the books of the Bible into two parts: the books of the Old Testament primarily sourced from the Tanakh (with some variations), and the 27 books of the New Testament containing books originally written primarily in Greek.[3] Some versions of the Christian Bible have a separate Apocrypha section for the books not considered canonical by the publisher. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Old Testament canons contain books not found in the Tanakh, but that are found in the Greek Septuagint, the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

The Bible, or some portion of it, had been translated into more than 2,300 languages or dialects as of 2003.[4]

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Etymology

* 2 Tanakh

o 2.1 Torah

o 2.2 Nevi'im

o 2.3 Ketuvim

o 2.4 Hebrew Bible translations and editions

* 3 The two Torahs of Rabbinic Judaism

* 4 The Old Testament

o 4.1 Differing Christian usages of the Old Testament

* 5 The New Testament

o 5.1 Original language

o 5.2 Historic editions

* 6 Christian theology

* 7 The canonization of the Bible

o 7.1 Canonization of the Hebrew Bible

o 7.2 Canonization of the Old Testament and New Testament

o 7.3 Ethiopian Orthodox canon

* 8 Bible versions and translations

o 8.1 Important characteristics of early Bible texts

o 8.2 Differences in Bible translations

o 8.3 Inclusive language

o 8.4 The introduction of chapters and verses

* 9 Textual criticism

o 9.1 Early criticism

o 9.2 The documentary hypothesis

o 9.3 Modern developments

o 9.4 Theological responses

+ 9.4.1 Judaism

+ 9.4.2 Christianity

* 10 Archaeological and historical research

o 10.1 Nomadist theory

* 11 See also

o 11.1 Biblical analysis

o 11.2 Perspectives on the Bible

o 11.3 History and the Bible

o 11.4 Biblical scholarship and analysis

o 11.5 Bible societies

o 11.6 Commentaries

* 12 Notes and references

* 13 External links

o 13.1 Wikis

Etymology

An American family Bible dating to 1859.

An American family Bible dating to 1859.

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word bible[5] is from Anglo-Latin biblia, traced from the same word through Medieval Latin and Late Latin, as used in the phrase biblia sacra ("holy books"). This stemmed from the term (Greek: τὰ βιβλία τὰ ἅγια Ta biblia ta hagia, "the holy books"), which derived from biblion ("paper" or "scroll," the ordinary word for "book"), which was originally a diminutive of byblos ("Egyptian papyrus"), possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician port Byblos from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece.

Biblical scholar Mark Hamilton states that the Greek phrase Ta biblia ("the books") was "an expression Hellenistic Jews used to describe their sacred books several centuries before the time of Jesus,"[6] and would have referred to the Septuagint.[7] The Online Etymology Dictionary states, "The Christian scripture was referred to in Greek as Ta Biblia as early as c.223."

Tanakh

Main article: Tanakh

The Tanakh (Hebrew: תנ"ך) consists of 24 books. Tanakh is an acronym for the three parts of the Hebrew Bible: the Torah ("Teaching/Law" also known as the Pentateuch), Nevi'im ("Prophets"), and Ketuvim ("Writings," or Hagiographa), and is used commonly by Jews but unfamiliar to many English speakers and others (Alexander 1999, p. 17). (See Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture).

Torah

Main article: Torah

The Torah, or "Instruction," is also known as the "Five Books" of Moses, thus Chumash from Hebrew meaning "fivesome," and Pentateuch from Greek meaning "five scroll-cases."

Part of a series on

Judaism

Judaism

Portal | Category

Jews · Judaism · Denominations

Orthodox · Conservative · Reform

Haredi · Hasidic · Modern Orthodox

Reconstructionist · Renewal · Rabbinic

Karaite · Samaritanism

Jewish philosophy

Principles of faith · Minyan · Kabbalah

Noahide laws · God · Eschatology · Messiah

Chosenness · Holocaust · Halakha · Kashrut

Modesty · Tzedakah · Ethics · Mussar

Religious texts

Torah · Tanakh · Talmud · Midrash · Tosefta

Rabbinic works · Kuzari · Mishneh Torah

Tur · Shulchan Aruch · Mishnah Berurah

Ḥumash · Siddur · Piyutim · Zohar · Tanya

Holy cities

Jerusalem · Safed · Hebron · Tiberias

Important figures

Abraham · Isaac · Jacob/Israel

Sarah · Rebecca · Rachel · Leah

Moses · Deborah · Ruth · David · Solomon

Elijah · Hillel · Shammai · Judah the Prince

Saadia Gaon · Rashi · Rif · Ibn Ezra · Tosafists

Rambam · Ramban · Gersonides

Yosef Albo · Yosef Karo · Rabbeinu Asher

Baal Shem Tov · Alter Rebbe · Vilna Gaon

Leopold Zunz · Israel Jacobson · Abraham Geiger

Ovadia Yosef · Moshe Feinstein · Elazar Shach

Lubavitcher Rebbe

Jewish life cycle

Brit · Bar/Bat Mitzvah · Shidduch · Marriage

Niddah · Naming · Pidyon HaBen · Bereavement

Religious roles

Rabbi · Rebbe · Hazzan

Kohen/Priest · Mashgiach · Gabbai · Maggid

Mohel · Beth din · Rosh yeshiva

Religious buildings

Synagogue · Mikvah · Holy Temple / Tabernacle

Religious articles

Tallit · Tefillin · Kipa · Sefer Torah

Tzitzit · Mezuzah · Menorah · Shofar

4 Species · Kittel · Gartel · Yad

Jewish prayers

Jewish services · Shema · Amidah · Aleinu

Kol Nidre · Kaddish · Hallel · Ma Tovu · Havdalah

Judaism & other religions

Christianity · Islam · Catholicism · Reconciliation

Abrahamic faiths · Judeo-Paganism · Pluralism

Mormonism · "Judeo-Christian" · Others

Related topics

Criticism of Judaism · Zionism

Antisemitism · Philo-Semitism · Yeshiva

v • d • e

The Torah comprises the following five books:

* 1. Genesis, Ge—Bere#### (בראשית)

* 2. Exodus, Ex—Shemot (שמות)

* 3. Leviticus, Le—Vayikra (ויקרא)

* 4. Numbers, Nu—Bamidbar (במדבר)

* 5. Deuteronomy, Dt—Devarim (דברים)

The Hebrew book titles come from the first words in the respective texts. The Hebrew title for Numbers, however, comes from the fifth word of that text.

The Torah focuses on three moments in the changing relationship between God and people. The first eleven chapters of Genesis provide accounts of the creation (or ordering) of the world, and the history of God's early relationship with humanity. The remaining thirty-nine chapters of Genesis provide an account of God's covenant with the Hebrew patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (also called Israel), and Jacob's children (the "Children of Israel"), especially Joseph. It tells of how God commanded Abraham to leave his family and home in the city of Ur, eventually to settle in the land of Canaan, and how the Children of Israel later moved to Egypt. The remaining four books of the Torah tell the story of Moses, who lived hundreds of years after the patriarchs. His story coincides with the story of the liberation of the Children of Israel from slavery in Ancient Egypt, to the renewal of their covenant with God at Mount Sinai, and their wanderings in the desert until a new generation would be ready to enter the land of Canaan. The Torah ends with the death of Moses.

Traditionally, the Torah contains the 613 mitzvot, or commandments, of God, revealed during the passage from slavery in the land of Egypt to freedom in the land of Canaan. These commandments provide the basis for Halakha (Jewish religious law).

The Torah is divided into fifty-four portions which are read in turn in Jewish liturgy, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Deuteronomy, each Sabbath. The cycle ends and recommences at the end of Sukkot, which is called Simchat Torah.

Nevi'im

Main article: Nevi'im

The Nevi'im, or "Prophets," tell the story of the rise of the Hebrew monarchy, its division into two kingdoms, and the prophets who, in God's name, warned the kings and the Children of Israel about the punishement of God. It ends with the conquest of the Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians and the conquest of the Kingdom of Judah by the Babylonians, and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Portions of the prophetic books are read by Jews on the Sabbath (Shabbat). The Book of Jonah is read on Yom Kippur.

According to Jewish tradition, Nevi'im is divided into eight books. Contemporary translations subdivide these into seventeen books.

The Nevi'im comprise the following eight books:

* 6. Joshua, Js—Yehoshua (יהושע)

* 7. Judges, Jg—Shoftim (שופטים)

* 8. Samuel, includes First and Second, 1Sa–2Sa—Shemuel (שמואל)

* 9. Kings, includes First and Second, 1Ki–2Ki—Melakhim (מלכים)

* 10. Isaiah, Is—Yeshayahu (ישעיהו)

* 11. Jeremiah, Je—Yirmiyahu (ירמיהו)

* 12. Ezekiel, Ez—Yekhezkel (יחזקאל)

* 13. Twelve, includes all Minor Prophets—Tre Asar (תרי עשר)

o a. Hosea, Ho—Hoshea (הושע)

o b. Joel, Jl—Yoel (יואל)

o c. Amos, Am—Amos (עמוס)

o d. Obadiah, Ob—Ovadyah (עבדיה)

o e. Jonah, Jh—Yonah (יונה)

o f. Micah, Mi—Mikhah (מיכה)

o g. Nahum, Na—Nahum (נחום)

o h. Habakkuk, Hb—Havakuk (חבקוק)

o i. Zephaniah, Zp—Tsefanya (צפניה)

o j. Haggai, Hg—Khagay (חגי)

o k. Zechariah, Zc—Zekharyah (זכריה)

o l. Malachi, Ml—Malakhi (מלאכי)

Ketuvim

Main article: Ketuvim

The Ketuvim, or "Writings" or "Scriptures," may have been written during or after the Babylonian Exile but no one can be sure. According to Rabbinic tradition, many of the psalms in the book of Psalms are attributed to David; King Solomon is believed to have written Song of Songs in his youth, Proverbs at the prime of his life, and Ecclesiastes at old age; and the prophet Jeremiah is thought to have written Lamentations. The Book of Ruth is the only biblical book that centers entirely on a non-Jew. The book of Ruth tells the story of a non-Jew (specifically, a Moabite) who married a Jew and, upon his death, followed in the ways of the Jews; according to the Bible, she was the great-grandmother of King David. Five of the books, called "The Five Scrolls" (Megilot), are read on Jewish holidays: Song of Songs on Passover; the Book of Ruth on Shavuot; Lamentations on the Ninth of Av; Ecclesiastes on Sukkot; and the Book of Esther on Purim. Collectively, the Ketuvim contain lyrical poetry, philosophical reflections on life, and the stories of the prophets and other Jewish leaders during the Babylonian exile. It ends with the Persian decree allowing Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple.

The Ketuvim comprise the following eleven books:

* 14. Psalms, Ps—Tehillim (תהלים)

* 15. Proverbs, Pr—Mishlei (משלי)

* 16. Job, Jb—Iyyov (איוב)

* 17. Song of Songs, So—Shir ha-Shirim (שיר השירים)

* 18. Ruth, Ru—Rut (רות)

* 19. Lamentations, La—Eikhah (איכה), also called Kinot (קינות)

* 20. Ecclesiastes, Ec—Kohelet (קהלת)

* 21. Esther, Es—Ester (אסתר)

* 22. Daniel, Dn—Daniel (דניאל)

* 23. Ezra, Ea, includes Nehemiah, Ne—Ezra (עזרא), includes Nehemiah (נחמיה)

* 24. Chronicles, includes First and Second, 1Ch–2Ch—Divrei ha-Yamim (דברי הימים), also called Divrei (דברי)

Hebrew Bible translations and editions

Main article: Bible translations

The Tanakh was mainly written in biblical Hebrew, with some portions (notably in Daniel and Ezra) in Aramaic.[8]

Some time in the 2nd or 3rd century BCE, the Torah was translated into Koine Greek, and over the next century, other books were translated (or composed) as well. This translation became known as the Septuagint and was widely used by Greek-speaking Jews, and later by Christians.[9] It differs somewhat from the later standardized Hebrew (Masoretic Text). This translation was promoted by way of a legend that seventy separate translators all produced identical texts.[10]

From the 800s to the 1400s, Jewish scholars today known as Masoretes compared the text of all known biblical manuscripts in an effort to create a unified, standardized text. A series of highly similar texts eventually emerged, and any of these texts are known as Masoretic Texts (MT). The Masoretes also added vowel points (called niqqud) to the text, since the original text only contained consonant letters. This sometimes required the selection of an interpretation, since some words differ only in their vowels—their meaning can vary in accordance with the vowels chosen. In antiquity, variant Hebrew readings existed, some of which have survived in the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea scrolls, and other ancient fragments, as well as being attested in ancient versions in other languages.[11]

Versions of the Septuagint contain several passages and whole books beyond what was included in the Masoretic texts of the Tanakh. In some cases these additions were originally composed in Greek, while in other cases they are translations of Hebrew books or variants not present in the Masoretic texts. Recent discoveries have shown that more of the Septuagint additions have a Hebrew origin than was once thought. While there are no complete surviving manuscripts of the Hebrew texts on which the Septuagint was based, many scholars believe that they represent a different textual tradition ("Vorlage") from the one that became the basis for the Masoretic texts.[11]

Jews also produced non-literal translations or paraphrases known as targums, primarily in Aramaic. They frequently expanded on the text with additional details taken from Rabbinic oral tradition.

The two Torahs of Rabbinic Judaism

By the Hellenistic period of Jewish history, Jews were divided over the nature of the Torah. Some (for example, the Sadducees) believed that the Chumash contained the entire Torah, that is, the entire contents of what God revealed to Moses at Sinai and in the desert. Others, principally the Pharisees, believed that the Chumash represented only that portion of the revelation that had been written down (i.e., the Written Torah or the Written Law), but that the rest of God's revelation had been passed down orally (thus composing the Oral Law or Oral Torah). Orthodox and Masorti and Conservative Judaism state that the Talmud contains some of the Oral Torah. Reform Judaism also gives credence to the Talmud containing the Oral Torah, but, as with the written Torah, asserts that both were inspired by, but not dictated by, God.

The Old Testament

The Old Testament, is the collection of books written prior to the life of Jesus, but accepted by Christians as scripture. Broadly speaking, it is the same as the Hebrew Bible, however it divides and orders them differently, and varies from Judaism in interpretation and emphasis. Several Christian denominations also incorporate additional books into their canons of the Old Testament. A few groups consider particular translations to be divinely inspired, notably the Septuagint and the King James Version.

Differing Christian usages of the Old Testament

The Septuagint (Greek translation, from Alexandria in Egypt under the Ptolemies) was generally abandoned in favour of the Masoretic text as the basis for translations of the Old Testament into Western languages from Martin Luther's Protestant Bible to the present day; already Jerome's Vulgate was based on the Hebrew. In Eastern Christianity, translations based on the Septuagint still prevail. Some modern Western translations make use of the Septuagint to clarify passages in the Masoretic text, where the Septuagint may preserve a variant reading of the Hebrew text. They also sometimes adopt variants that appear in texts discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

A number of books which are part of the Greek Septuagint but are not found in the Hebrew (Rabbinic) Bible are often referred to as deuterocanonical books by Catholics referring to a later secondary (i.e., deutero) canon. Most Protestants term these books as apocrypha. Evangelicals and those of the Modern Protestant traditions do not accept the deuterocanonical books as canonical, although Protestant Bibles included them until around the 1820s. However, the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox Churches include these books as part of their Old Testament. The Catholic Church recognizes seven such books (Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch), as well as some passages in Esther and Daniel. Various Orthodox Churches include a few others, typically 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, Odes, Psalms of Solomon, and the Prayer of Manasseh. The Anglican Church uses the Apocryphal books liturgically, but not to establish doctrine. Therefore, editions of the Bible intended for use in the Anglican Church include these books, plus 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh.

The New Testament

Main article: New Testament

The Bible as used by the majority of Christians includes the Rabbinic Hebrew Scripture and the New Testament, which relates the life and teachings of Jesus, the letters of the Apostle Paul and other disciples to the early church and the Book of Revelation.

Part of a series of articles on

Christianity

Christian cross

Jesus Christ

Virgin birth · Resurrection

Foundations

Church · New Covenant

Apostles · Kingdom · Gospel

History of Christianity · Timeline

Bible

Old Testament · New Testament

Books · Canon · Apocrypha

Septuagint · Decalogue

Sermon on the Mount

Great Commission

Translations (English)

Inspiration · Hermeneutics

Christian theology

Monotheism

Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

History of · Theology · Apologetics

Creation · Fall of Man · Covenant · Law

Grace · Faith · Justification · Salvation

Sanctification · Theosis · Worship

Church · Sacraments · Eschatology

Dispensationalism · Covenant Theology

New Covenant Theology

History and traditions

Early · Councils · Creeds · Missions

Great Schism · Crusades · Reformation

Great Awakenings · Great Apostasy

Restorationism · Nontrinitarianism

Thomism · Arminianism

Congregationalism

[show]Eastern Christianity

Eastern Orthodox · Oriental Orthodox · Syriac Christianity · Eastern Catholic

[show]Western Christianity

Western Catholicism · Protestantism · Anabaptism · Lutheranism · Calvinism · Anglicanism · Baptist · Methodism · Evangelicalism · Fundamentalism · Unitarianism · Liberalism · Pentecostalism · Christian Science · Unity Church · Oneness Pentecostalism

[show]Restorationism

Adventism · Christadelphians · Jehovah's Witnesses · Latter-day Saint movement (Mormonism)

Topics in Christianity

Movements · Denominations

Ecumenism · Relation to other religions

Preaching · Prayer

Music · Liturgy · Calendar

Symbols · Art · Criticism

Important figures

Apostle Paul · Church Fathers

Constantine · Athanasius · Augustine

Anselm · Aquinas · Palamas

Luther · Calvin · Wesley

Arius · Marcion of Sinope

Archbishop of Canterbury · Pope

Coptic Pope · Ecumenical Patriarch

Christianity Portal

This box: view • talk • edit

The New Testament is a collection of 27 books, of 4 different genres of Christian literature (Gospels, one account of the Acts of the Apostles, Epistles and an Apocalypse). Jesus is its central figure. The New Testament was written primarily in Koine Greek in the early Christian period. Nearly all Christians recognize the New Testament (as stated below) as canonical scripture. These books can be grouped into:

The Gospels

* Synoptic Gospels

o Gospel According to Matthew, Mt

o Gospel According to Mark, Mk

o Gospel According to Luke, Lk

* Gospel According to John, Jn

* Acts of the Apostles, Ac (continues Luke)

Pauline Epistles

* Epistle to the Romans, Ro

* First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1Co

* Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2Co

* Epistle to the Galatians, Ga

* Epistle to the Ephesians, Ep

* Epistle to the Philippians, Pp

* Epistle to the Colossians, Cl

* First Epistle to the Thessalonians, 1Th

* Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, 2Th

* Pastoral Epistles

o First Epistle to Timothy, 1Ti

o Second Epistle to Timothy, 2Ti

o Epistle to Titus, Tt

* Epistle to Philemon, Pm

* Epistle to the Hebrews, He

General Epistles, also called Jewish Epistles

* Epistle of James, Jm

* First Epistle of Peter, 1Pe

* Second Epistle of Peter, 2Pe

* First Epistle of John, 1Jn

* Second Epistle of John, 2Jn

* Third Epistle of John, 3Jn

* Epistle of Jude, Jd

* Revelation, Re

Original language

Probably, the books of the New Testament were written in Koine Greek, the language of the earliest extant manuscripts, even though some authors often included translations from Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Certainly the Pauline Epistles were written in Greek for Greek-speaking audiences. See Greek primacy. Some scholars believe that some books of the Greek New Testament (in particular, the Gospel of Matthew) are actually translations of a Hebrew or Aramaic original. Of these, a small number accept the Syriac Pe####ta as representative of the original. See Aramaic primacy.

Historic editions

See also: Biblical manuscript and Bible translations

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at the Royal Library in Sweden.

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at the Royal Library in Sweden.

When ancient scribes copied earlier books, they wrote notes on the margins of the page (marginal glosses) to correct their text—especially if a scribe accidentally omitted a word or line—and to comment about the text. When later scribes were copying the copy, they were sometimes uncertain if a note was intended to be included as part of the text. See textual criticism. Over time, different regions evolved different versions, each with its own assemblage of omissions and additions.

The autographs, the Greek manuscripts written by the original authors, have not survived. Scholars surmise the original Greek text from the versions that do survive. The three main textual traditions of the Greek New Testament are sometimes called the Alexandrian text-type (generally minimalist), the Byzantine text-type (generally maximalist), and the Western text-type (occasionally wild). Together they comprise most of the ancient manuscripts.

There are also several ancient translations, most important of which are in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic (including the Pe####ta and the Diatessaron gospel harmony), in the Ethiopian language of Ge'ez, and in Latin (both the Vetus Latina and the Vulgate).

The earliest surviving complete manuscript of the entire Bible is the Codex Amiatinus, a Latin Vulgate edition produced in eighth century England at the double monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow.

The earliest printed edition of the Greek New Testament appeared in 1516 from the Froben press, by Desiderius Erasmus, who reconstructed its Greek text from several recent manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. He occasionally added a Greek translation of the Latin Vulgate for parts that did not exist in the Greek manuscripts. He produced four later editions of this text. Erasmus was Roman Catholic, but his preference for the Byzantine Greek manuscripts rather than the Latin Vulgate led some church authorities to view him with suspicion.

The first printed edition with critical apparatus (noting variant readings among the manuscripts) was produced by the printer Robert Estienne of Paris in 1550. The Greek text of this edition and of those of Erasmus became known as the Textus Receptus (Latin for "received text"), a name given to it in the Elzevier edition of 1633, which termed it as the text nunc ab omnibus receptum ("now received by all").

The churches of the Protestant Reformation translated the Greek of the Textus Receptus to produce vernacular Bibles, such as the German Luther Bible and the English King James Bible.

The discovery of older manuscripts, which belong to the Alexandrian text-type, including the 4th-century Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, led scholars to revise their view about the original Greek text. Attempts to reconstruct the original text are called critical editions. Karl Lachmann based his critical edition of 1831 on manuscripts dating from the 4th century and earlier, to demonstrate that the Textus Receptus must be corrected according to these earlier texts.

Later critical editions incorporate ongoing scholarly research, including discoveries of Greek papyrus fragments from near Alexandria, Egypt, that date in some cases within a few decades of the original New Testament writings.[12] Today, most critical editions of the Greek New Testament, such as UBS4 and NA27, consider the Alexandrian text-type corrected by papyrii, to be the Greek text that is closest to the original autographs. Their apparatus includes the result of votes among scholars, ranging from certain {A} to doubtful {E}, on which variants best preserve the original Greek text of the New Testament.

Most variants among the manuscripts are minor, such as alternate spelling, alternate word order, the presence or absence of an optional definite article ("the"), and so on. Occasionally, a major variant happens when a portion of a text was accidentally omitted (or perhaps even censored), or was added from a marginal gloss. Fortunately, major variants tend to be easier to correct.

Critical editions that rely primarily on the Alexandrian text-type inform nearly all modern translations (and revisions of older translations).

However for reasons of tradition, especially the doctrine of the inerrancy of the King James Bible, some modern scholars prefer to use the Textus Receptus for the Greek text, or use the Majority Text which is similar to it but is a critical edition that relies on earlier manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. Among these scholars, some argue that the Byzantine tradition contains scribal additions, but these later interpolations preserve the orthodox interpretations of the biblical text—as part of the ongoing Christian experience—and in this sense are authoritative.

Christian theology

While individual books within the Christian Bible present narratives set in certain historical periods, most Christian denominations teach that the Bible itself has an overarching message.

There are among Christians wide differences of opinion as to how particular incidents as described in the Bible are to be interpreted and as to what meaning should be attached to various prophecies. However, Christians in general are in agreement as to the Bible's basic message. A general outline, as described by C.S. Lewis, is as follows:[13]

1. At some point in the past, humanity learned to depart from God's will and began to sin.

2. Because no one is free from sin, people cannot deal with God directly, so God revealed Himself in ways people could understand.

3. God called Abraham and his progeny to be the means for saving all of humanity.

4. To this end, He gave the Law to Moses.

5. The resulting nation of Israel went through cycles of sin and repentance, yet the prophets show an increasing understanding of the Law as a moral, not just a ceremonial, force.

6. Jesus brought a perfect understanding of the Mosaic Law, that of love and salvation.

7. By His death and resurrection, all who believe are saved and reconciled to God.

Many people who identify themselves as Christians, Muslims, or Jews regard the Bible as inspired by God yet written by a variety of imperfect men over thousands of years. Bible-believing Christians regard both the New and Old Testament as the undiluted Word of God, spoken by God and written down in its perfect form by humans. Belief in sacred texts is attested to in Jewish antiquity,[14][15] and this belief can also be seen in the earliest of Christian writings. Various texts of the Bible mention Divine agency in relation to prophetic writings,[16] the most explicit being 2 Tm 3:16: "All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." In their book A General Introduction to the Bible, Norman Geisler and William Nix wrote: "The process of inspiration is a mystery of the providence of God, but the result of this process is a verbal, plenary, inerrant, and authoritative record."[17] Some biblical scholars,[18][19][20] particularly Evangelicals, associate inspiration with only the original text; for example some American Protestants adhere to the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy which asserted that inspiration applied only to the autographic text of Scripture.[21]

The canonization of the Bible

Main article: Biblical Canon

The word "canon" etymologically means cane or reed. In early Christianity "canon" referred to a list of books approved for public reading. Books not on the list were referred to as "apocryphal" — meaning they were for private reading only. Under Latin usage from the fourth century on, canon came to stand for a closed and authoritative list in the sense of rule or norm.[22]

Canonization of the Hebrew Bible

The New Testament refers to the threefold division of the Hebrew Scriptures: the law, the prophets, and the writings. Luke 24:44 refers to the "law of Moses" (Pentateuch), the "prophets" which include certain historical books in addition to the books now called "prophets," and the psalms (the "writings" designated by its most prominent collection). The Hebrew Bible probably was canonized in these three stages: the law canonized before the Exile, the prophets by the time of the Syrian persecution of the Jews, and the writings shortly after AD 70 (the fall of Jerusalem). About that time, early Christian writings began being accepted by Christians as "scripture." These events, taken together, may have caused the Jews to close their "canon." They listed their own recognized Scriptures and also excluded both Christian and Jewish writings considered by them to be "apocryphal." In this canon the thirty-nine books found in the Old Testament of today's Christian Bibles were grouped together as twenty-two books, equaling the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. This canon of Jewish scripture is attested to by Philo, Josephus, the New Testament (Luke 11:51, Luke 24:44), and the Talmud.[22]

The New Testament writers assumed the inspiration of the Old Testament, probably earliest stated in 2 Timothy 3:16 which may be rendered "All Scripture is inspired of God" or "Every God-inspired Scripture is profitable for teaching." Both translations consider inspiration as a fact.[22]

Canonization of the Old Testament and New Testament

The Old Testament canon entered into Christian use in the Greek Septuagint translations and original books, and their differing lists of texts. In addition to the Septuagint, Christianity subsequently added various writings that would become the New Testament. Somewhat different lists of accepted works continued to develop in antiquity. In the fourth century a series of synods produced a list of texts equal to the 46-book canon of the Old testament and to the 27-book canon of the New Testament that would be subsequently used to today, most notably the Synod of Hippo in AD 393. Also c. 400, Jerome produced a definitive Latin edition of the Bible (see Vulgate), the canon of which, at the insistence of the Pope, was in accord with the earlier Synods. With the benefit of hindsight it can be said that this process effectively set the New Testament canon, although there are examples of other canonical lists in use after this time. A definitive list did not come from an Ecumenical Council until the Council of Trent (1545–63). [citation needed]

During the Protestant Reformation, certain reformers proposed different canonical lists than what was currently in use. Though not without debate, the list of New Testament books would come to remain the same; however, the Old Testament texts present in the Septuagint, but not included in the Jewish canon, fell out of favour. In time they would come to be removed from most Protestant canons. Hence, in a Catholic context these texts are referred to as deuterocanonical books, whereas in a Protestant context they are referred to as Apocrypha, the label applied to all texts excluded from the biblical canon. It should also be noted, that Catholics and Protestants both describe certain other books, such as the Acts of Peter, as apocryphal.

Thus, the Protestant Old Testament of today has a 39-book canon—the number varies from that of the books in the Tanakh (though not in content) because of a different method of division—while the Roman Catholic Church recognizes 46 books as part of the canonical Old Testament. The term "Hebrew Scriptures" is only synonymous with the Protestant Old Testament, not the Catholic, which contains the Hebrew Scriptures and additional texts. Both Catholics and Protestants have the same 27-book New Testament Canon.

Canonicity, which involves the discernment of which texts are divinely inspired, is distinct from questions of human authorship and the formation of the books of the Bible.[citation needed]

Ethiopian Orthodox canon

The Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church is wider than for most other Christian groups. The Ethiopian "narrower" Old Testament Canon includes the books found in the Septuagint accepted by other Orthodox Christians, in addition to Enoch, Jubilees, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, 3 books of Meqabyan (Maccabees), and Psalm 151. However, the three books of Meqabyan are similar to Maccabees in title only, and quite different in content from those of the other Christian churches which include them. The order of the other books is somewhat different from other groups', as well. The Church also has a "broader canon" that includes more books.[23]

Bible versions and translations

Further information: Bible translations

A Bible handwritten in Latin, on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England. This Bible was transcribed in Belgium in 1407 for reading aloud in a monastery.

A Bible handwritten in Latin, on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England. This Bible was transcribed in Belgium in 1407 for reading aloud in a monastery.

In scholarly writing, ancient translations are frequently referred to as "versions," with the term "translation" being reserved for medieval or modern translations.[citation needed] Bible versions are discussed below, while Bible translations can be found on a separate page.

The original texts of the Tanakh were in Hebrew, although some portions were in Aramaic. In addition to the authoritative Masoretic Text, Jews still refer to the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, and the Targum Onkelos, an Aramaic version of the Bible. There are several different ancient versions of the Tanakh in Hebrew, mostly differing by spelling, and the traditional Jewish version is based on the version known as Aleppo Codex. Even in this version by itself, there are words which are traditionally read differently than written (sometimes one word is written and another is read), because the oral tradition is considered more fundamental than the written one, and presumably mistakes had been made in copying the text over the generations.

The primary biblical text for early Christians was the Septuagint or (LXX). In addition they translated the Hebrew Bible into several other languages. Translations were made into Syriac, Coptic, Ge'ez and Latin, among other languages. The Latin translations were historically the most important for the Church in the West, while the Greek-speaking East continued to use the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament and had no need to translate the New Testament.

The earliest Latin translation was the Old Latin text, or Vetus Latina, which, from internal evidence, seems to have been made by several authors over a period of time. It was based on the Septuagint, and thus included books not in the Hebrew Bible.

Pope Damasus I assembled the first list of books of the Bible at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. He commissioned Saint Jerome to produce a reliable and consistent text by translating the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin. This translation became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible and was declared by the Church to be the only authentic and official Bible.

Bible translations for many languages have been made through the various influences of Catholicism, Orthodox, Protestant, etc especially since the Protestant Reformation. The Bible has seen a notably large number of English language translations.

The work of Bible translation continues, including by Christian organisations such as Wycliffe Bible Translators (wycliffe.net), New Tribes Missions (ntm.org) and the Bible Societies (biblesociety.org). Of the world's 6,900 languages, 2,400 have some or all of the Bible, 1,600 (spoken by more than a billion people) have translation underway, and some 2,500 (spoken by 270 million people) are judged as needing translation to begin.[24]

Important characteristics of early Bible texts

See also: Chapters and verses of the Bible

* The use of chapters and verses was not introduced until the Middle Ages and later. The system used in English was developed by Stephanus (Robert Estienne of Paris) (as noted below)

* Early manuscripts of the letters of Paul and other New Testament writings show no punctuation whatsoever. [1] The punctuation was added later by other editors, according to their own understanding of the text.

Differences in Bible translations

This Gutenberg Bible is displayed by the United States Library of Congress.

This Gutenberg Bible is displayed by the United States Library of Congress.

See also: Bible translations: Approaches.

As Hebrew and Greek, the original languages of the Bible, have idioms and concepts not easily translated, there is an on going critical tension about whether it is better to give a word for word translation or to give a translation that gives a parallel idiom in the target language. For instance, in the English language Catholic translation, the New American Bible, as well as the Protestant translations of the Christian Bible, translations like the King James Version, the New Revised Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible are seen as literal translations (or "word for word"), whereas translations like the New International Version and New Living Version attempt to give relevant parallel idioms. The Living Bible and The Message are two paraphrases of the Bible that try to convey the original meaning in contemporary language. The further away one gets from word to word translation, the text becomes easier to read while relying more on the theological, linguistic or cultural understanding of the translator, which one would not normally expect a lay reader to require.

Inclusive language

Traditionally, English masculine pronouns have been used interchangeably to refer to the male gender and to all people. For instance, "All men are mortal" is not intended to imply that males are mortal but females are immortal. English language readers and hearers have had to interpret masculine pronouns (and such words as "man" and "mankind") based on context. Further, both Hebrew and Greek, like some of the Latin-origin languages, use the male gender of nouns and pronouns to refer to groups that contain both sexes. This creates some difficulty in determining whether a noun or pronoun should be translated using terms that refer to men only, or generically to men and women inclusively. Context sometimes, but not always, helps determine whether to decode them in a gender-insensitive or gender-specific way.

Contemporary language has changed in many cases to reflect criticism of the use of the masculine gender, which has been characterized as discriminatory. Current style guides, such as APA, MLA, NCTE, and others, have published statements encouraging, and in some cases requiring, the use of inclusive language, which avoids language this approach regards as sexist or class-distinctive.

Until recently, virtually all English translations of the Bible have used masculine nouns and pronouns both specifically (to refer to males) and generically (when the reference is not necessarily gender-specific). Recent examples of translations which incorporate gender-inclusive language include the New Revised Standard Version, the Revised English Bible, and Today's New International Version.

Comparison of Traditional vs Gender-Inclusive Translations of Rom. 12:6-8 Original New International Version Today's New International Version

We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully. We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

The introduction of chapters and verses

Main article: Chapters and verses of the Bible

See Tanakh for the Jewish textual tradition.

The Hebrew Masoretic text contains verse endings as an important feature. According to the Talmudic tradition, the verse endings are of ancient origin. The Masoretic textual tradition also contains section endings called parashiyot, which are indicated by a space within a line (a "closed" section") or a new line beginning (an "open" section). The division of the text reflected in the parashiyot is usually thematic. The parashiyot are not numbered.

In early manuscripts (most importantly in Tiberian Masoretic manuscripts, such as the Aleppo codex) an "open" section may also be represented by a blank line, and a "closed" section by a new line that is slightly indented (the preceding line may also not be full). These latter conventions are no longer used in Torah scrolls and printed Hebrew Bibles. In this system the one rule differentiating "open" and "closed" sections is that "open" sections must always begin at the beginning of a new line, while "closed" sections never start at the beginning of a new line.

Another related feature of the Masoretic text is the division of the sedarim. This division is not thematic, but is almost entirely based upon the quantity of text.

The Byzantines also introduced a chapter division of sorts, called Kephalaia. It is not identical to the present chapters.

The current division of the Bible into chapters and the verse numbers within the chapters has no basis in any ancient textual tradition. Rather, they are medieval Christian inventions. They were later adopted by many Jews as well, as technical references within the Hebrew text. Such technical references became crucial to medieval rabbis in the historical context of forced debates with Christian clergy (who used the chapter and verse numbers), especially in late medieval Spain.[25] Chapter divisions were first used by Jews in a 1330 manuscript and for a printed edition in 1516. However, for the past generation, most Jewish editions of the complete Hebrew Bible have made a systematic effort to relegate chapter and verse numbers to the margins of the text.

The division of the Bible into chapters and verses has often elicited severe criticism from traditionalists and modern scholars alike. Critics charge that the text is often divided into chapters in an incoherent way, or at inappropriate rhetorical points, and that it encourages citing passages out of context, in effect turning the Bible into a kind of textual quarry for clerical citations. Nevertheless, the chapter divisions and verse numbers have become indispensable as technical references for Bible study.

Stephen Langton is reputed to have been the first to put the chapter divisions into a Vulgate edition of the Bible, in 1205. They were then inserted into Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in the 1400s. Robert Estienne (Robert Stephanus) was the first to number the verses within each chapter, his verse numbers entering printed editions in 1551 (New Testament) and 1571 (Hebrew Bible).[26][27]

Textual criticism

Main articles: Biblical criticism and Criticism of the Bible.

Textual criticism refers to the investigation of the Bible as a text, and addresses questions such as authorship, dates of composition, and authorial intention.

Early criticism

The traditional view of the Mosaic authorship of the Torah came under sporadic criticism from medieval scholars including Isaac ibn Yashush, Abraham ibn Ezra, Bonfils of Damascus and bishop Tostatus of Avila, who pointed to passages such as the description of the death of Moses in Deuteronomy as evidence that some portions, at least, could not have been written by Moses. In the 17th century Thomas Hobbes collected the current evidence and became the first scholar to conclude outright that Moses could not have written the bulk of the Torah. Shortly afterwards the philosopher Baruch Spinoza published a unified critical analysis, demonstrating that the problematic passages were not isolated cases that could be explained away one by one, but pervasive throughout the five books, concluding that it was "clearer than the sun at noon that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses…." Despite determined opposition from the Church, both Catholic and Protestant, the views of Hobbes and Spinoza gained increasing acceptance amongst scholars.

The documentary hypothesis

Scholars intrigued by the hypothesis that Moses had not written the Pentateuch considered other authors. Independent but nearly simultaneous proposals by H. B. Witter, Jean Astruc, and J. G. Eichhorn separated the Pentateuch into two original documentary components, both dating from after the time of Moses. Others hypothesized the presence of two additional sources. The four documents were given working titles: J (or Yahwist), E (Elohist), P (Priestly), and D (Deuteronomist), each was discernible by its own characteristic language, and each, when read in isolation, presented a unified, coherent narrative.

Subsequent scholars, notably Eduard Reuss, Karl Heinrich Graf and Wilhelm Vatke, turned their attention to the order in which the documents had been composed (which they deduced from internal clues) and placed them in the context of a theory of the development of ancient Israelite religion, suggesting that much of the Laws and the narrative of the Pentateuch were unknown to the Israelites in the time of Moses. These were synthesized by Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), who suggested a historical framework for the composition of the documents and their redaction (combination) into the final document known as the Pentateuch. This hypothesis was challenged by William Henry Green in his The Mosaic Origins of the Pentateuchal Codes (available online). Nonetheless, according to contemporary Torah scholar Richard Elliott Friedman, Wellhausen's model of the documentary hypothesis continues to dominate the field of biblical scholarship: "To this day, if you want to disagree, you disagree with Wellhausen. If you want to pose a new model, you compare its merits with those of Wellhausen's model."[28]

The documentary hypothesis is important in the field of biblical studies not only because it claims that the Torah was written by different people at different times—generally long after the events it describes—[29] but it also proposed what was at the time a radically new way of reading the Bible. Many proponents of the documentary hypothesis view the Bible more as a body of literature than a work of history, believing that the historical value of the text lies not in its account of the events that it describes, but in what critics can infer about the times in which the authors lived (as critics may read Hamlet to learn about seventeenth-century England, but will not read it to learn about seventh-century Denmark).

Modern developments

The critical analysis of authorship now encompasses every book of the Bible. Every book in turn has been hypothesized to bear traces of multiple authorship[citation needed], even the book of Obadiah[citation needed], which is only a single page. In some cases the traditional view on authorship has been overturned; in others, additional support, at least in part has been found.

The development of the hypothesis has not stopped with Wellhausen. Wellhausen's hypothesis, for example, proposed that the four documents were composed in the order J-E-D-P, with P, containing the bulk of the Jewish law, dating from the post-Exilic Second Temple period (i.e., after 515 BC);[30] but the contemporary view is that P is earlier than D, and that all four books date from the First Temple period (i.e., prior to 587 BC).[31] The documentary hypothesis has more recently been refined by later scholars such as Martin Noth (who in 1943 provided evidence that Deuteronomy plus the following six books make a unified history from the hand of a single editor), Harold Bloom, Frank Moore Cross and Richard Elliot Friedman.

The documentary hypothesis, at least in the four-document version advanced by Wellhausen, has been controversial since its formulation. The direction of this criticism is to question the existence of separate, identifiable documents, positing instead that the biblical text is made up of almost innumerable strands so interwoven as to be hardly untangleable—the J document, in particular, has been subjected to such intense dissection that it seems in danger of disappearing.

Although biblical archeology has confirmed the existence of many people, places, and events mentioned in the Bible, many critical scholars have argued that the Bible be read not as an accurate historical document, but rather as a work of literature and theology that often draws on historical events—as well as upon non-Hebrew mythology—as primary source material. For these scholars, the Bible reveals much about the lives and times of its authors and compilers. The relevance of these ideas to contemporary religious life is left to clerics and adherents of contemporary religions to decide.

Theological responses

Judaism

The claim that the Torah—"the Five Books of Moses"—were not written by Moses, but by many authors long after Moses was said to have lived, directly challenged Jewish orthodoxy. For most, this claim implies that the Torah itself—especially its account of God's revelation at Mt. Sinai—is not historically reliable. Although many Orthodox scholars have rejected this "Higher Criticism", most Conservative and virtually all Reform Jewish scholars have accepted it. Consequently, there has been considerable debate among Jewish scholars as to the nature of revelation and the divine nature of the Torah. Conservative Jewish philosopher Elliot Dorff has categorized five distinct major Jewish positions in these debates within Conservative Judaism in the 20th century[32]:

* Orthodox (characterized by Eliezer Berkovitz and Norman Lamm): "Verbal Revelation: The Torah, including both the Written and Oral Traditions, consists of the exact words of God. He gave it all as one piece at Sinai."*

* Conservative I (characterized by Isaac Lesser, Alexander Kohut, Abraham Joshua Heschel, and David Novak): "Continuous Revelation:God dictated His will at Sinai and other times. It was written down by human beings, however, and hence the diverse traditions in the Bible."

* Conservative II (characterized by Ben Zion Bokser, Robert Gordis, Max Routtenberg and Emil Fackenheim): "Continuous Revelation: Human beings wrote the Torah, but they were divinely inspired."

* Conservative III (characterized by Louis Jacobs, Seymour Seigel, Jacob Agus, David Lieber and Elliot Dorff): "Continuous Revelation: The Torah is the human record of the concounter between God and the People Israel at Sinai. Since it was written by human beings, it contains some laws and ideas which we find repugnant today."

* Conservative IV/Reconstructionist (characterized by Mordecai Kaplan, Ira Eisenstein and Harold Schulweis): "No Revelation: Human beings wrote the Torah. No claim for divinity of the product."

In addition to the 5 categories described by Elliott, other positions have been adopted:

* Traditional Rabbi David Weiss HaLivni, the founder of the Union for Traditional Judaism, adapted a position he describes as chatu yisrael ("Israel sinned"), that God revealed the Torah to Moses on Mount Sinai but it subsequently became corrupted and lost, and Ezra restored it by redacting it from multiple manuscripts reflecting disparate traditions. Under this view, the Torah is the best available record of the Divine will, has prophetic commendation, and is binding on the Jewish people, but is not necessarily entirely free of disparaties. [33]

* Reform (characterized by the Movement's 1937 Guiding Principles): "Progressive revelation: The Torah is God's will written by human beings. As time goes on, we get to understand his will better and better (="progressive revelation").

* Reconstructionist Reconstructionist Judaism generally adapts the textual critical approach in toto and regards the Torah as either inspired rather than revealed, or an entirely human product rather than the product of an external God.

Christianity

In 1943 pope Pius XII's encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu gave the Vatican's imprimatur to textual criticism.

Archaeological and historical research

Main article: Biblical Archaeology

According to recent theories, linguistic as well as archaeological, the global structure of the texts in the Hebrew Bible were compiled during the reign of King Josiah in the 7th Century BC. Even though the components are derived from more ancient writings, the final form of the books is believed to have been set somewhere between the 1st Century BC and the 4th Century AD.

With regard to the Exodus and the 40-year sojourn in the desert, archaeological digs in possible Biblical locations have been unsuccessful so far. There is also no archaeological evidence of a conquest of the land and cities of Canaan of the kind recounted in the Book of Joshua.

However, after the split of the Kingdom of Israel in the second half of the 9th Century BC, archaeological findings fit the Biblical chronology.

Nomadist theory

The ancestors of the Hebrews and the Jews are believed to be either nomads who have become sedentary, or people from the plains of Canaan, who fled to the highlands to escape the control of the cities. These positions are held by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman in The Bible Unearthed, by the American archaeologist William Dever in Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come from?, and by Jean-Marie Husser, professor at Marc Bloch University in Strasbourg, France.

See also

Bible Portal

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

Bible

Look up Bible in

Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Bible

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

The Bible and Works about the Bible

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

1911 Britannica entry

Biblical analysis

* Bible chronology

* Bible citation

* Bible prophecy

* Bible translations

* Biblical canon

* Bibliomancy is the use of random readings from a book for divination. In Jewish and Christian cultures, the Bible is often used.

* Books of the Bible

* Lost books of the Bible

* New Testament view on Jesus' life

* Parsha

* Ritual Decalogue

* Study Bible

* Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture

* Ten Commandments

Perspectives on the Bible

* Calvin's view of Scripture

* Jewish Biblical exegesis

* Islamic view of the Bible

* Biblical narratives and the Qur'an

History and the Bible

* The Bible and history

* History of the English Bible

* English Translations of the Bible

Biblical scholarship and analysis

* Bible Translations

* Biblical archaeology

* Dating the Bible

* Bible conspiracy theory

* Biblical literalism

* Biblical inerrancy

* Internal consistency and the Bible

* Bible scientific foreknowledge

* Criticism of the Bible

* Animals in the Bible

* Alcohol in the Bible

* Bibliolatry

* Old Testament: Timeline

Bible societies

* See Bible society for a list.

Commentaries

See Biblical exegesis

Notes and references

1. ^ Dictionary.com

2. ^ See Patrick H. Alexander The SBL Handbook of Style. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers. ISBN 1-56563-487-X.

3. ^ http://www.pcusa.org/101/101-bible.htm

4. ^ Bible Society stats.

5. ^ Online Etymology Dictionary entry for word "Bible"

6. ^ "From Hebrew Bible to Christian Bible" by Mark Hamilton on PBS's site From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians

7. ^ Dictionary.com etymology of the word "Bible"

8. ^ Bible Study, Bible Facts (HTML). Retrieved on 2007-11-05.

9. ^ Karen Jobes and Moises Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint ISBN 1-84227-061-3, (Paternoster Press, 2001). - The current standard for Introductory works on the Septuagint.

10. ^ Jennifer M. Dines, The Septuagint, Michael A. Knibb, Ed., London: T&T Clark, 2004

11. ^ a b Menachem Cohen, The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism in HaMikrah V'anachnu, ed. Uriel Simon, HaMachon L'Yahadut U'Machshava Bat-Z'mananu and Dvir, Tel-Aviv, 1979

12. ^ Metzger, Bruce R. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography (Oxford University Press, 1981) cf. Papyrus 52

13. ^ A Summary of the Bible by Lewis, CS: Believer's Web.

14. ^ Philo of Alexandria, De vita Moysis 3.23.

15. ^ Josephus, Contra Apion 1.8.

16. ^ "Basis for belief of Inspiration". Biblegateway.

17. ^ Norman L. Geisler, William E. Nix (1986). A General Introduction to the Bible. Moody Publishers, 86. ISBN 0-8024-2916-5.

18. ^ for example, seeLeroy Zuck, Roy B. Zuck (1991). Basic Bible Interpretation. Chariot Victor Pub, 68. ISBN 0-89693-819-0.

19. ^ Roy B. Zuck, Donald Campbell (2002). Basic Bible Interpretation. Victor. ISBN 0-7814-3877-2.

20. ^ Norman L. Geisler (1979, 1980). Inerrancy. The Zondervan Corporation, 294. ISBN 0-310-39281-0.

21. ^ International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (1978). "The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" (pdf). International Council on Biblical Inerrancy.

22. ^ a b c Stagg, Frank. New Testament Theology. Nashville: Broadman, 1962. ISBN 0805416137

23. ^ Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament (HTML). Retrieved on 2007-11-05.

24. ^ www.vision2025.org

25. ^ see Spanish Inquisition

26. ^ Chapters and Verses.

27. ^ The Examiner.

28. ^ Richard Elliott Friedman, "Who Wrote the Bible?," HarperSanFrancisco, 1997 (2nd edition).

29. ^ Joel Rosenberg, 1984 "The Bible: Biblical Narrative" in Barry Holtz, ed Back to the Sources New York: Summit Books p. 36; Nahum Sarna, 1986 Understanding Genesis New York:Schocken Books p. xxi-xxiii

30. ^ Wellhausen adopted the idea of a post-Exilic date for P from Eduard Reuss.

31. ^ Although the bulk of all four documents date from before 587 BCE, the strand of D known as Dtr2 dates from the following Exilic period.

32. ^ Elliot Dorff 1978 Conservative Judaism: Our Ancestors to Our Descendents New York: United Synagogue Youth pp. 114-115

33. ^ Rabbi David Weiss HaLivni, Revelation Restored: Divine Writ and Critical Responses. Westview Press, 2001. ISBN 978-0813333472

* Anderson, Bernhard W. Understanding the Old Testament. ISBN 0-13-948399-3.

* Berlin, Adele, Marc Zvi Brettler and Michael Fishbane. The Jewish Study Bible. Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-529751-2.

* Asimov, Isaac. Asimov's Guide to the Bible. New York, NY: Avenel Books, 1981. ISBN 0-517-34582-X.

* Dever, William G. Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did they Come from? Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003. ISBN 0-8028-0975-8.

* Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why New York, NY: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005. ISBN 0-06-073817-0.

* Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil A. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001. ISBN 0-684-86913-6.

* Geisler, Norman (editor). Inerrancy. Sponsored by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. Zondervan Publishing House, 1980, ISBN 0-310-39281-0.

* Head, Tom. The Absolute Beginner's Guide to the Bible. Indianapolis, IN: Que Publishing, 2005. ISBN 0-7897-3419-2.

* Hoffman, Joel M. In the Beginning. New York University Press, 2004. ISBN 0-8147-3690-4.

* Lindsell, Harold. The Battle for the Bible. Zondervan Publishing House, 1978. ISBN 0-310-27681-0.

* Lienhard, Joseph T. The Bible, The Church, and Authority. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995.

* Miller, John W. The Origins of the Bible: Rethinking Canon History Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1994. ISBN 0-8091-3522-1.

* Riches, John. The Bible: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2000. ISBN 0-19-285343-0

* Taylor, Hawley O. "Mathematics and Prophecy." Modern Science and Christian Faith. Wheaton: Van Kampen, 1948, pp. 175–83.

* Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, s.vv. "Book of Ezekiel," p. 580 and "prophecy," p. 1410. Chicago: Moody Bible Press, 1986.

 

[JaxBill]

No, it doesn't bother me. What does bother me is that you:

a) Took one sentence out of context to try to lead a fishing expedition.

b) make it sound like Catholics are the only religion where leaders try to sway voter opinion.

Larger snippet-

In the midst of the 2008 presidential campaign season, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops overwhelmingly endorsed an updated statement on faith and politics designed to help Catholics fulfill their political responsibilities to vote and run for office.

"It is not a voter guide," said Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, N.Y., who presented a final version of the statement before the conference here. "It calls us as bishops to help form consciences for political life, not tell people how to vote or whom to vote for or against."

The statement, titled "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility," outlined the bishops' consensus on various topics, such as opposition to same-sex marriage and the death penalty, while providing a "consistent moral framework" for assessing political platforms.

"A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position," said the text. "In such cases, a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil."

The bishops acknowledged there may be times when Catholics reject a candidate's "unacceptable position" on one issue, but vote for the candidate anyway. The bishops said such a choice would "be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil."

"Unless we're going to give up our right to vote . . . it may be that we never find the perfect candidate," said Bishop Michael J. Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colo. "So there's where we have to try to decide which of the candidates do we think is at least going to propose and move toward the greatest good."

The bishops' statement went beyond earthly concerns, saying political choices "may affect the individuals' salvation."

"One of the responsibilities that I believe we have as bishops is to let our people know that the choices and the decisions that they make in their lives here on Earth do impact their salvation," said Bishop Samuel J. Aquila of Fargo, N.D. "And we as bishops are really called to be about the salvation of souls, eternal life, and for Catholics who choose to support intrinsic evils . . . they may be putting their salvation at risk."

Bishops said the reference to salvation is meant not to cast judgment on individuals but make them aware of the possible effects of their choices.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...story?track=rssTo me, what they're saying is don't vote for somebody if the primary you're voting for them is because they're pro-choice.

In my personal experience, I've never had a pastor tell me to vote for a person or even a party. the Catholic Church here in the US really can't pick a party because the Church is pro-Life which the Republicans usually champion but they're also for social programs which is usually the Democrats cause.

Cograts on your expedition!

 

[Lester Burnham]

Filibuster is good shtick, BTW

 

[CrossEyed]

As a pastor, I would never have the arrogance to tell someone how they should vote. That's an individual decision. But to tie their salvation to their vote is especially troubling to me.

My girlfriend's brother's Babtist church has the arrogance to tell people how to vote. They even let Republicans stump for candidate during their Sunday service. No joke.

I have no problem with churches providing voter's guides so that their congregations can be educated before they head to the polls. But to spell out specific issues that people "must" vote for in order to be a good _________ (Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, etc.) is just wrong. And to tell people that their salvation is at stake is just horrible, imo.

 

[matuski]

But what do you guys think of this?

Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia •

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Bible (disambiguation).

Part of a series on

The Bible

Biblical canon

* Chapters and verses of the Bible

* Hebrew Bible/Tanakh

* Torah

* Prophets

* Writings

* Old Testament

* Deuterocanonicals

* New Testament

* Antilegomena

Bible translations

* English translations of the Bible

Research

* Biblical manuscript

* Documentary hypothesis

* Biblical narratives and the Qur'an

Views

* Biblical inerrancy

* Criticism of the Bible

This box: view • talk • edit

The Bible is

* Part of Category:Judaism

(see The Hebrew Bible below)

* Part of a series on Christianity

(see The New Testament below)

The word Bible refers to the canonical collections of religious writings or books of Judaism and Christianity.[1] Books included as canon in the Bible vary according to these religious traditions and among their denominations. These variations reflect a range of histories, traditions and myths.

The Jewish version of the Bible, the Tanakh, includes the books common to both the Christian and Jewish biblical canons.[2] The Torah is traditionally considered by believers to be God's direct words and thus thought to be the most sacred part. Much of the Jewish religious law is derived from the Torah.

The Christian version of the Bible is often called the Holy Bible, Scriptures, or Word of God. It divides the books of the Bible into two parts: the books of the Old Testament primarily sourced from the Tanakh (with some variations), and the 27 books of the New Testament containing books originally written primarily in Greek.[3] Some versions of the Christian Bible have a separate Apocrypha section for the books not considered canonical by the publisher. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Old Testament canons contain books not found in the Tanakh, but that are found in the Greek Septuagint, the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

The Bible, or some portion of it, had been translated into more than 2,300 languages or dialects as of 2003.[4]

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Etymology

* 2 Tanakh

o 2.1 Torah

o 2.2 Nevi'im

o 2.3 Ketuvim

o 2.4 Hebrew Bible translations and editions

* 3 The two Torahs of Rabbinic Judaism

* 4 The Old Testament

o 4.1 Differing Christian usages of the Old Testament

* 5 The New Testament

o 5.1 Original language

o 5.2 Historic editions

* 6 Christian theology

* 7 The canonization of the Bible

o 7.1 Canonization of the Hebrew Bible

o 7.2 Canonization of the Old Testament and New Testament

o 7.3 Ethiopian Orthodox canon

* 8 Bible versions and translations

o 8.1 Important characteristics of early Bible texts

o 8.2 Differences in Bible translations

o 8.3 Inclusive language

o 8.4 The introduction of chapters and verses

* 9 Textual criticism

o 9.1 Early criticism

o 9.2 The documentary hypothesis

o 9.3 Modern developments

o 9.4 Theological responses

+ 9.4.1 Judaism

+ 9.4.2 Christianity

* 10 Archaeological and historical research

o 10.1 Nomadist theory

* 11 See also

o 11.1 Biblical analysis

o 11.2 Perspectives on the Bible

o 11.3 History and the Bible

o 11.4 Biblical scholarship and analysis

o 11.5 Bible societies

o 11.6 Commentaries

* 12 Notes and references

* 13 External links

o 13.1 Wikis

Etymology

An American family Bible dating to 1859.

An American family Bible dating to 1859.

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word bible[5] is from Anglo-Latin biblia, traced from the same word through Medieval Latin and Late Latin, as used in the phrase biblia sacra ("holy books"). This stemmed from the term (Greek: τὰ βιβλία τὰ ἅγια Ta biblia ta hagia, "the holy books"), which derived from biblion ("paper" or "scroll," the ordinary word for "book"), which was originally a diminutive of byblos ("Egyptian papyrus"), possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician port Byblos from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece.

Biblical scholar Mark Hamilton states that the Greek phrase Ta biblia ("the books") was "an expression Hellenistic Jews used to describe their sacred books several centuries before the time of Jesus,"[6] and would have referred to the Septuagint.[7] The Online Etymology Dictionary states, "The Christian scripture was referred to in Greek as Ta Biblia as early as c.223."

Tanakh

Main article: Tanakh

The Tanakh (Hebrew: תנ"ך) consists of 24 books. Tanakh is an acronym for the three parts of the Hebrew Bible: the Torah ("Teaching/Law" also known as the Pentateuch), Nevi'im ("Prophets"), and Ketuvim ("Writings," or Hagiographa), and is used commonly by Jews but unfamiliar to many English speakers and others (Alexander 1999, p. 17). (See Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture).

Torah

Main article: Torah

The Torah, or "Instruction," is also known as the "Five Books" of Moses, thus Chumash from Hebrew meaning "fivesome," and Pentateuch from Greek meaning "five scroll-cases."

Part of a series on

Judaism

Judaism

Portal | Category

Jews · Judaism · Denominations

Orthodox · Conservative · Reform

Haredi · Hasidic · Modern Orthodox

Reconstructionist · Renewal · Rabbinic

Karaite · Samaritanism

Jewish philosophy

Principles of faith · Minyan · Kabbalah

Noahide laws · God · Eschatology · Messiah

Chosenness · Holocaust · Halakha · Kashrut

Modesty · Tzedakah · Ethics · Mussar

Religious texts

Torah · Tanakh · Talmud · Midrash · Tosefta

Rabbinic works · Kuzari · Mishneh Torah

Tur · Shulchan Aruch · Mishnah Berurah

Ḥumash · Siddur · Piyutim · Zohar · Tanya

Holy cities

Jerusalem · Safed · Hebron · Tiberias

Important figures

Abraham · Isaac · Jacob/Israel

Sarah · Rebecca · Rachel · Leah

Moses · Deborah · Ruth · David · Solomon

Elijah · Hillel · Shammai · Judah the Prince

Saadia Gaon · Rashi · Rif · Ibn Ezra · Tosafists

Rambam · Ramban · Gersonides

Yosef Albo · Yosef Karo · Rabbeinu Asher

Baal Shem Tov · Alter Rebbe · Vilna Gaon

Leopold Zunz · Israel Jacobson · Abraham Geiger

Ovadia Yosef · Moshe Feinstein · Elazar Shach

Lubavitcher Rebbe

Jewish life cycle

Brit · Bar/Bat Mitzvah · Shidduch · Marriage

Niddah · Naming · Pidyon HaBen · Bereavement

Religious roles

Rabbi · Rebbe · Hazzan

Kohen/Priest · Mashgiach · Gabbai · Maggid

Mohel · Beth din · Rosh yeshiva

Religious buildings

Synagogue · Mikvah · Holy Temple / Tabernacle

Religious articles

Tallit · Tefillin · Kipa · Sefer Torah

Tzitzit · Mezuzah · Menorah · Shofar

4 Species · Kittel · Gartel · Yad

Jewish prayers

Jewish services · Shema · Amidah · Aleinu

Kol Nidre · Kaddish · Hallel · Ma Tovu · Havdalah

Judaism & other religions

Christianity · Islam · Catholicism · Reconciliation

Abrahamic faiths · Judeo-Paganism · Pluralism

Mormonism · "Judeo-Christian" · Others

Related topics

Criticism of Judaism · Zionism

Antisemitism · Philo-Semitism · Yeshiva

v • d • e

The Torah comprises the following five books:

* 1. Genesis, Ge—Bere#### (בראשית)

* 2. Exodus, Ex—Shemot (שמות)

* 3. Leviticus, Le—Vayikra (ויקרא)

* 4. Numbers, Nu—Bamidbar (במדבר)

* 5. Deuteronomy, Dt—Devarim (דברים)

The Hebrew book titles come from the first words in the respective texts. The Hebrew title for Numbers, however, comes from the fifth word of that text.

The Torah focuses on three moments in the changing relationship between God and people. The first eleven chapters of Genesis provide accounts of the creation (or ordering) of the world, and the history of God's early relationship with humanity. The remaining thirty-nine chapters of Genesis provide an account of God's covenant with the Hebrew patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (also called Israel), and Jacob's children (the "Children of Israel"), especially Joseph. It tells of how God commanded Abraham to leave his family and home in the city of Ur, eventually to settle in the land of Canaan, and how the Children of Israel later moved to Egypt. The remaining four books of the Torah tell the story of Moses, who lived hundreds of years after the patriarchs. His story coincides with the story of the liberation of the Children of Israel from slavery in Ancient Egypt, to the renewal of their covenant with God at Mount Sinai, and their wanderings in the desert until a new generation would be ready to enter the land of Canaan. The Torah ends with the death of Moses.

Traditionally, the Torah contains the 613 mitzvot, or commandments, of God, revealed during the passage from slavery in the land of Egypt to freedom in the land of Canaan. These commandments provide the basis for Halakha (Jewish religious law).

The Torah is divided into fifty-four portions which are read in turn in Jewish liturgy, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Deuteronomy, each Sabbath. The cycle ends and recommences at the end of Sukkot, which is called Simchat Torah.

Nevi'im

Main article: Nevi'im

The Nevi'im, or "Prophets," tell the story of the rise of the Hebrew monarchy, its division into two kingdoms, and the prophets who, in God's name, warned the kings and the Children of Israel about the punishement of God. It ends with the conquest of the Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians and the conquest of the Kingdom of Judah by the Babylonians, and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Portions of the prophetic books are read by Jews on the Sabbath (Shabbat). The Book of Jonah is read on Yom Kippur.

According to Jewish tradition, Nevi'im is divided into eight books. Contemporary translations subdivide these into seventeen books.

The Nevi'im comprise the following eight books:

* 6. Joshua, Js—Yehoshua (יהושע)

* 7. Judges, Jg—Shoftim (שופטים)

* 8. Samuel, includes First and Second, 1Sa–2Sa—Shemuel (שמואל)

* 9. Kings, includes First and Second, 1Ki–2Ki—Melakhim (מלכים)

* 10. Isaiah, Is—Yeshayahu (ישעיהו)

* 11. Jeremiah, Je—Yirmiyahu (ירמיהו)

* 12. Ezekiel, Ez—Yekhezkel (יחזקאל)

* 13. Twelve, includes all Minor Prophets—Tre Asar (תרי עשר)

o a. Hosea, Ho—Hoshea (הושע)

o b. Joel, Jl—Yoel (יואל)

o c. Amos, Am—Amos (עמוס)

o d. Obadiah, Ob—Ovadyah (עבדיה)

o e. Jonah, Jh—Yonah (יונה)

o f. Micah, Mi—Mikhah (מיכה)

o g. Nahum, Na—Nahum (נחום)

o h. Habakkuk, Hb—Havakuk (חבקוק)

o i. Zephaniah, Zp—Tsefanya (צפניה)

o j. Haggai, Hg—Khagay (חגי)

o k. Zechariah, Zc—Zekharyah (זכריה)

o l. Malachi, Ml—Malakhi (מלאכי)

Ketuvim

Main article: Ketuvim

The Ketuvim, or "Writings" or "Scriptures," may have been written during or after the Babylonian Exile but no one can be sure. According to Rabbinic tradition, many of the psalms in the book of Psalms are attributed to David; King Solomon is believed to have written Song of Songs in his youth, Proverbs at the prime of his life, and Ecclesiastes at old age; and the prophet Jeremiah is thought to have written Lamentations. The Book of Ruth is the only biblical book that centers entirely on a non-Jew. The book of Ruth tells the story of a non-Jew (specifically, a Moabite) who married a Jew and, upon his death, followed in the ways of the Jews; according to the Bible, she was the great-grandmother of King David. Five of the books, called "The Five Scrolls" (Megilot), are read on Jewish holidays: Song of Songs on Passover; the Book of Ruth on Shavuot; Lamentations on the Ninth of Av; Ecclesiastes on Sukkot; and the Book of Esther on Purim. Collectively, the Ketuvim contain lyrical poetry, philosophical reflections on life, and the stories of the prophets and other Jewish leaders during the Babylonian exile. It ends with the Persian decree allowing Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple.

The Ketuvim comprise the following eleven books:

* 14. Psalms, Ps—Tehillim (תהלים)

* 15. Proverbs, Pr—Mishlei (משלי)

* 16. Job, Jb—Iyyov (איוב)

* 17. Song of Songs, So—Shir ha-Shirim (שיר השירים)

* 18. Ruth, Ru—Rut (רות)

* 19. Lamentations, La—Eikhah (איכה), also called Kinot (קינות)

* 20. Ecclesiastes, Ec—Kohelet (קהלת)

* 21. Esther, Es—Ester (אסתר)

* 22. Daniel, Dn—Daniel (דניאל)

* 23. Ezra, Ea, includes Nehemiah, Ne—Ezra (עזרא), includes Nehemiah (נחמיה)

* 24. Chronicles, includes First and Second, 1Ch–2Ch—Divrei ha-Yamim (דברי הימים), also called Divrei (דברי)

Hebrew Bible translations and editions

Main article: Bible translations

The Tanakh was mainly written in biblical Hebrew, with some portions (notably in Daniel and Ezra) in Aramaic.[8]

Some time in the 2nd or 3rd century BCE, the Torah was translated into Koine Greek, and over the next century, other books were translated (or composed) as well. This translation became known as the Septuagint and was widely used by Greek-speaking Jews, and later by Christians.[9] It differs somewhat from the later standardized Hebrew (Masoretic Text). This translation was promoted by way of a legend that seventy separate translators all produced identical texts.[10]

From the 800s to the 1400s, Jewish scholars today known as Masoretes compared the text of all known biblical manuscripts in an effort to create a unified, standardized text. A series of highly similar texts eventually emerged, and any of these texts are known as Masoretic Texts (MT). The Masoretes also added vowel points (called niqqud) to the text, since the original text only contained consonant letters. This sometimes required the selection of an interpretation, since some words differ only in their vowels—their meaning can vary in accordance with the vowels chosen. In antiquity, variant Hebrew readings existed, some of which have survived in the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea scrolls, and other ancient fragments, as well as being attested in ancient versions in other languages.[11]

Versions of the Septuagint contain several passages and whole books beyond what was included in the Masoretic texts of the Tanakh. In some cases these additions were originally composed in Greek, while in other cases they are translations of Hebrew books or variants not present in the Masoretic texts. Recent discoveries have shown that more of the Septuagint additions have a Hebrew origin than was once thought. While there are no complete surviving manuscripts of the Hebrew texts on which the Septuagint was based, many scholars believe that they represent a different textual tradition ("Vorlage") from the one that became the basis for the Masoretic texts.[11]

Jews also produced non-literal translations or paraphrases known as targums, primarily in Aramaic. They frequently expanded on the text with additional details taken from Rabbinic oral tradition.

The two Torahs of Rabbinic Judaism

By the Hellenistic period of Jewish history, Jews were divided over the nature of the Torah. Some (for example, the Sadducees) believed that the Chumash contained the entire Torah, that is, the entire contents of what God revealed to Moses at Sinai and in the desert. Others, principally the Pharisees, believed that the Chumash represented only that portion of the revelation that had been written down (i.e., the Written Torah or the Written Law), but that the rest of God's revelation had been passed down orally (thus composing the Oral Law or Oral Torah). Orthodox and Masorti and Conservative Judaism state that the Talmud contains some of the Oral Torah. Reform Judaism also gives credence to the Talmud containing the Oral Torah, but, as with the written Torah, asserts that both were inspired by, but not dictated by, God.

The Old Testament

The Old Testament, is the collection of books written prior to the life of Jesus, but accepted by Christians as scripture. Broadly speaking, it is the same as the Hebrew Bible, however it divides and orders them differently, and varies from Judaism in interpretation and emphasis. Several Christian denominations also incorporate additional books into their canons of the Old Testament. A few groups consider particular translations to be divinely inspired, notably the Septuagint and the King James Version.

Differing Christian usages of the Old Testament

The Septuagint (Greek translation, from Alexandria in Egypt under the Ptolemies) was generally abandoned in favour of the Masoretic text as the basis for translations of the Old Testament into Western languages from Martin Luther's Protestant Bible to the present day; already Jerome's Vulgate was based on the Hebrew. In Eastern Christianity, translations based on the Septuagint still prevail. Some modern Western translations make use of the Septuagint to clarify passages in the Masoretic text, where the Septuagint may preserve a variant reading of the Hebrew text. They also sometimes adopt variants that appear in texts discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

A number of books which are part of the Greek Septuagint but are not found in the Hebrew (Rabbinic) Bible are often referred to as deuterocanonical books by Catholics referring to a later secondary (i.e., deutero) canon. Most Protestants term these books as apocrypha. Evangelicals and those of the Modern Protestant traditions do not accept the deuterocanonical books as canonical, although Protestant Bibles included them until around the 1820s. However, the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox Churches include these books as part of their Old Testament. The Catholic Church recognizes seven such books (Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch), as well as some passages in Esther and Daniel. Various Orthodox Churches include a few others, typically 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, Odes, Psalms of Solomon, and the Prayer of Manasseh. The Anglican Church uses the Apocryphal books liturgically, but not to establish doctrine. Therefore, editions of the Bible intended for use in the Anglican Church include these books, plus 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh.

The New Testament

Main article: New Testament

The Bible as used by the majority of Christians includes the Rabbinic Hebrew Scripture and the New Testament, which relates the life and teachings of Jesus, the letters of the Apostle Paul and other disciples to the early church and the Book of Revelation.

Part of a series of articles on

Christianity

Christian cross

Jesus Christ

Virgin birth · Resurrection

Foundations

Church · New Covenant

Apostles · Kingdom · Gospel

History of Christianity · Timeline

Bible

Old Testament · New Testament

Books · Canon · Apocrypha

Septuagint · Decalogue

Sermon on the Mount

Great Commission

Translations (English)

Inspiration · Hermeneutics

Christian theology

Monotheism

Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

History of · Theology · Apologetics

Creation · Fall of Man · Covenant · Law

Grace · Faith · Justification · Salvation

Sanctification · Theosis · Worship

Church · Sacraments · Eschatology

Dispensationalism · Covenant Theology

New Covenant Theology

History and traditions

Early · Councils · Creeds · Missions

Great Schism · Crusades · Reformation

Great Awakenings · Great Apostasy

Restorationism · Nontrinitarianism

Thomism · Arminianism

Congregationalism

[show]Eastern Christianity

Eastern Orthodox · Oriental Orthodox · Syriac Christianity · Eastern Catholic

[show]Western Christianity

Western Catholicism · Protestantism · Anabaptism · Lutheranism · Calvinism · Anglicanism · Baptist · Methodism · Evangelicalism · Fundamentalism · Unitarianism · Liberalism · Pentecostalism · Christian Science · Unity Church · Oneness Pentecostalism

[show]Restorationism

Adventism · Christadelphians · Jehovah's Witnesses · Latter-day Saint movement (Mormonism)

Topics in Christianity

Movements · Denominations

Ecumenism · Relation to other religions

Preaching · Prayer

Music · Liturgy · Calendar

Symbols · Art · Criticism

Important figures

Apostle Paul · Church Fathers

Constantine · Athanasius · Augustine

Anselm · Aquinas · Palamas

Luther · Calvin · Wesley

Arius · Marcion of Sinope

Archbishop of Canterbury · Pope

Coptic Pope · Ecumenical Patriarch

Christianity Portal

This box: view • talk • edit

The New Testament is a collection of 27 books, of 4 different genres of Christian literature (Gospels, one account of the Acts of the Apostles, Epistles and an Apocalypse). Jesus is its central figure. The New Testament was written primarily in Koine Greek in the early Christian period. Nearly all Christians recognize the New Testament (as stated below) as canonical scripture. These books can be grouped into:

The Gospels

* Synoptic Gospels

o Gospel According to Matthew, Mt

o Gospel According to Mark, Mk

o Gospel According to Luke, Lk

* Gospel According to John, Jn

* Acts of the Apostles, Ac (continues Luke)

Pauline Epistles

* Epistle to the Romans, Ro

* First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1Co

* Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2Co

* Epistle to the Galatians, Ga

* Epistle to the Ephesians, Ep

* Epistle to the Philippians, Pp

* Epistle to the Colossians, Cl

* First Epistle to the Thessalonians, 1Th

* Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, 2Th

* Pastoral Epistles

o First Epistle to Timothy, 1Ti

o Second Epistle to Timothy, 2Ti

o Epistle to Titus, Tt

* Epistle to Philemon, Pm

* Epistle to the Hebrews, He

General Epistles, also called Jewish Epistles

* Epistle of James, Jm

* First Epistle of Peter, 1Pe

* Second Epistle of Peter, 2Pe

* First Epistle of John, 1Jn

* Second Epistle of John, 2Jn

* Third Epistle of John, 3Jn

* Epistle of Jude, Jd

* Revelation, Re

Original language

Probably, the books of the New Testament were written in Koine Greek, the language of the earliest extant manuscripts, even though some authors often included translations from Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Certainly the Pauline Epistles were written in Greek for Greek-speaking audiences. See Greek primacy. Some scholars believe that some books of the Greek New Testament (in particular, the Gospel of Matthew) are actually translations of a Hebrew or Aramaic original. Of these, a small number accept the Syriac Pe####ta as representative of the original. See Aramaic primacy.

Historic editions

See also: Biblical manuscript and Bible translations

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at the Royal Library in Sweden.

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at the Royal Library in Sweden.

When ancient scribes copied earlier books, they wrote notes on the margins of the page (marginal glosses) to correct their text—especially if a scribe accidentally omitted a word or line—and to comment about the text. When later scribes were copying the copy, they were sometimes uncertain if a note was intended to be included as part of the text. See textual criticism. Over time, different regions evolved different versions, each with its own assemblage of omissions and additions.

The autographs, the Greek manuscripts written by the original authors, have not survived. Scholars surmise the original Greek text from the versions that do survive. The three main textual traditions of the Greek New Testament are sometimes called the Alexandrian text-type (generally minimalist), the Byzantine text-type (generally maximalist), and the Western text-type (occasionally wild). Together they comprise most of the ancient manuscripts.

There are also several ancient translations, most important of which are in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic (including the Pe####ta and the Diatessaron gospel harmony), in the Ethiopian language of Ge'ez, and in Latin (both the Vetus Latina and the Vulgate).

The earliest surviving complete manuscript of the entire Bible is the Codex Amiatinus, a Latin Vulgate edition produced in eighth century England at the double monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow.

The earliest printed edition of the Greek New Testament appeared in 1516 from the Froben press, by Desiderius Erasmus, who reconstructed its Greek text from several recent manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. He occasionally added a Greek translation of the Latin Vulgate for parts that did not exist in the Greek manuscripts. He produced four later editions of this text. Erasmus was Roman Catholic, but his preference for the Byzantine Greek manuscripts rather than the Latin Vulgate led some church authorities to view him with suspicion.

The first printed edition with critical apparatus (noting variant readings among the manuscripts) was produced by the printer Robert Estienne of Paris in 1550. The Greek text of this edition and of those of Erasmus became known as the Textus Receptus (Latin for "received text"), a name given to it in the Elzevier edition of 1633, which termed it as the text nunc ab omnibus receptum ("now received by all").

The churches of the Protestant Reformation translated the Greek of the Textus Receptus to produce vernacular Bibles, such as the German Luther Bible and the English King James Bible.

The discovery of older manuscripts, which belong to the Alexandrian text-type, including the 4th-century Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, led scholars to revise their view about the original Greek text. Attempts to reconstruct the original text are called critical editions. Karl Lachmann based his critical edition of 1831 on manuscripts dating from the 4th century and earlier, to demonstrate that the Textus Receptus must be corrected according to these earlier texts.

Later critical editions incorporate ongoing scholarly research, including discoveries of Greek papyrus fragments from near Alexandria, Egypt, that date in some cases within a few decades of the original New Testament writings.[12] Today, most critical editions of the Greek New Testament, such as UBS4 and NA27, consider the Alexandrian text-type corrected by papyrii, to be the Greek text that is closest to the original autographs. Their apparatus includes the result of votes among scholars, ranging from certain {A} to doubtful {E}, on which variants best preserve the original Greek text of the New Testament.

Most variants among the manuscripts are minor, such as alternate spelling, alternate word order, the presence or absence of an optional definite article ("the"), and so on. Occasionally, a major variant happens when a portion of a text was accidentally omitted (or perhaps even censored), or was added from a marginal gloss. Fortunately, major variants tend to be easier to correct.

Critical editions that rely primarily on the Alexandrian text-type inform nearly all modern translations (and revisions of older translations).

However for reasons of tradition, especially the doctrine of the inerrancy of the King James Bible, some modern scholars prefer to use the Textus Receptus for the Greek text, or use the Majority Text which is similar to it but is a critical edition that relies on earlier manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. Among these scholars, some argue that the Byzantine tradition contains scribal additions, but these later interpolations preserve the orthodox interpretations of the biblical text—as part of the ongoing Christian experience—and in this sense are authoritative.

Christian theology

While individual books within the Christian Bible present narratives set in certain historical periods, most Christian denominations teach that the Bible itself has an overarching message.

There are among Christians wide differences of opinion as to how particular incidents as described in the Bible are to be interpreted and as to what meaning should be attached to various prophecies. However, Christians in general are in agreement as to the Bible's basic message. A general outline, as described by C.S. Lewis, is as follows:[13]

1. At some point in the past, humanity learned to depart from God's will and began to sin.

2. Because no one is free from sin, people cannot deal with God directly, so God revealed Himself in ways people could understand.

3. God called Abraham and his progeny to be the means for saving all of humanity.

4. To this end, He gave the Law to Moses.

5. The resulting nation of Israel went through cycles of sin and repentance, yet the prophets show an increasing understanding of the Law as a moral, not just a ceremonial, force.

6. Jesus brought a perfect understanding of the Mosaic Law, that of love and salvation.

7. By His death and resurrection, all who believe are saved and reconciled to God.

Many people who identify themselves as Christians, Muslims, or Jews regard the Bible as inspired by God yet written by a variety of imperfect men over thousands of years. Bible-believing Christians regard both the New and Old Testament as the undiluted Word of God, spoken by God and written down in its perfect form by humans. Belief in sacred texts is attested to in Jewish antiquity,[14][15] and this belief can also be seen in the earliest of Christian writings. Various texts of the Bible mention Divine agency in relation to prophetic writings,[16] the most explicit being 2 Tm 3:16: "All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." In their book A General Introduction to the Bible, Norman Geisler and William Nix wrote: "The process of inspiration is a mystery of the providence of God, but the result of this process is a verbal, plenary, inerrant, and authoritative record."[17] Some biblical scholars,[18][19][20] particularly Evangelicals, associate inspiration with only the original text; for example some American Protestants adhere to the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy which asserted that inspiration applied only to the autographic text of Scripture.[21]

The canonization of the Bible

Main article: Biblical Canon

The word "canon" etymologically means cane or reed. In early Christianity "canon" referred to a list of books approved for public reading. Books not on the list were referred to as "apocryphal" — meaning they were for private reading only. Under Latin usage from the fourth century on, canon came to stand for a closed and authoritative list in the sense of rule or norm.[22]

Canonization of the Hebrew Bible

The New Testament refers to the threefold division of the Hebrew Scriptures: the law, the prophets, and the writings. Luke 24:44 refers to the "law of Moses" (Pentateuch), the "prophets" which include certain historical books in addition to the books now called "prophets," and the psalms (the "writings" designated by its most prominent collection). The Hebrew Bible probably was canonized in these three stages: the law canonized before the Exile, the prophets by the time of the Syrian persecution of the Jews, and the writings shortly after AD 70 (the fall of Jerusalem). About that time, early Christian writings began being accepted by Christians as "scripture." These events, taken together, may have caused the Jews to close their "canon." They listed their own recognized Scriptures and also excluded both Christian and Jewish writings considered by them to be "apocryphal." In this canon the thirty-nine books found in the Old Testament of today's Christian Bibles were grouped together as twenty-two books, equaling the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. This canon of Jewish scripture is attested to by Philo, Josephus, the New Testament (Luke 11:51, Luke 24:44), and the Talmud.[22]

The New Testament writers assumed the inspiration of the Old Testament, probably earliest stated in 2 Timothy 3:16 which may be rendered "All Scripture is inspired of God" or "Every God-inspired Scripture is profitable for teaching." Both translations consider inspiration as a fact.[22]

Canonization of the Old Testament and New Testament

The Old Testament canon entered into Christian use in the Greek Septuagint translations and original books, and their differing lists of texts. In addition to the Septuagint, Christianity subsequently added various writings that would become the New Testament. Somewhat different lists of accepted works continued to develop in antiquity. In the fourth century a series of synods produced a list of texts equal to the 46-book canon of the Old testament and to the 27-book canon of the New Testament that would be subsequently used to today, most notably the Synod of Hippo in AD 393. Also c. 400, Jerome produced a definitive Latin edition of the Bible (see Vulgate), the canon of which, at the insistence of the Pope, was in accord with the earlier Synods. With the benefit of hindsight it can be said that this process effectively set the New Testament canon, although there are examples of other canonical lists in use after this time. A definitive list did not come from an Ecumenical Council until the Council of Trent (1545–63). [citation needed]

During the Protestant Reformation, certain reformers proposed different canonical lists than what was currently in use. Though not without debate, the list of New Testament books would come to remain the same; however, the Old Testament texts present in the Septuagint, but not included in the Jewish canon, fell out of favour. In time they would come to be removed from most Protestant canons. Hence, in a Catholic context these texts are referred to as deuterocanonical books, whereas in a Protestant context they are referred to as Apocrypha, the label applied to all texts excluded from the biblical canon. It should also be noted, that Catholics and Protestants both describe certain other books, such as the Acts of Peter, as apocryphal.

Thus, the Protestant Old Testament of today has a 39-book canon—the number varies from that of the books in the Tanakh (though not in content) because of a different method of division—while the Roman Catholic Church recognizes 46 books as part of the canonical Old Testament. The term "Hebrew Scriptures" is only synonymous with the Protestant Old Testament, not the Catholic, which contains the Hebrew Scriptures and additional texts. Both Catholics and Protestants have the same 27-book New Testament Canon.

Canonicity, which involves the discernment of which texts are divinely inspired, is distinct from questions of human authorship and the formation of the books of the Bible.[citation needed]

Ethiopian Orthodox canon

The Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church is wider than for most other Christian groups. The Ethiopian "narrower" Old Testament Canon includes the books found in the Septuagint accepted by other Orthodox Christians, in addition to Enoch, Jubilees, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, 3 books of Meqabyan (Maccabees), and Psalm 151. However, the three books of Meqabyan are similar to Maccabees in title only, and quite different in content from those of the other Christian churches which include them. The order of the other books is somewhat different from other groups', as well. The Church also has a "broader canon" that includes more books.[23]

Bible versions and translations

Further information: Bible translations

A Bible handwritten in Latin, on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England. This Bible was transcribed in Belgium in 1407 for reading aloud in a monastery.

A Bible handwritten in Latin, on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England. This Bible was transcribed in Belgium in 1407 for reading aloud in a monastery.

In scholarly writing, ancient translations are frequently referred to as "versions," with the term "translation" being reserved for medieval or modern translations.[citation needed] Bible versions are discussed below, while Bible translations can be found on a separate page.

The original texts of the Tanakh were in Hebrew, although some portions were in Aramaic. In addition to the authoritative Masoretic Text, Jews still refer to the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, and the Targum Onkelos, an Aramaic version of the Bible. There are several different ancient versions of the Tanakh in Hebrew, mostly differing by spelling, and the traditional Jewish version is based on the version known as Aleppo Codex. Even in this version by itself, there are words which are traditionally read differently than written (sometimes one word is written and another is read), because the oral tradition is considered more fundamental than the written one, and presumably mistakes had been made in copying the text over the generations.

The primary biblical text for early Christians was the Septuagint or (LXX). In addition they translated the Hebrew Bible into several other languages. Translations were made into Syriac, Coptic, Ge'ez and Latin, among other languages. The Latin translations were historically the most important for the Church in the West, while the Greek-speaking East continued to use the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament and had no need to translate the New Testament.

The earliest Latin translation was the Old Latin text, or Vetus Latina, which, from internal evidence, seems to have been made by several authors over a period of time. It was based on the Septuagint, and thus included books not in the Hebrew Bible.

Pope Damasus I assembled the first list of books of the Bible at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. He commissioned Saint Jerome to produce a reliable and consistent text by translating the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin. This translation became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible and was declared by the Church to be the only authentic and official Bible.

Bible translations for many languages have been made through the various influences of Catholicism, Orthodox, Protestant, etc especially since the Protestant Reformation. The Bible has seen a notably large number of English language translations.

The work of Bible translation continues, including by Christian organisations such as Wycliffe Bible Translators (wycliffe.net), New Tribes Missions (ntm.org) and the Bible Societies (biblesociety.org). Of the world's 6,900 languages, 2,400 have some or all of the Bible, 1,600 (spoken by more than a billion people) have translation underway, and some 2,500 (spoken by 270 million people) are judged as needing translation to begin.[24]

Important characteristics of early Bible texts

See also: Chapters and verses of the Bible

* The use of chapters and verses was not introduced until the Middle Ages and later. The system used in English was developed by Stephanus (Robert Estienne of Paris) (as noted below)

* Early manuscripts of the letters of Paul and other New Testament writings show no punctuation whatsoever. [1] The punctuation was added later by other editors, according to their own understanding of the text.

Differences in Bible translations

This Gutenberg Bible is displayed by the United States Library of Congress.

This Gutenberg Bible is displayed by the United States Library of Congress.

See also: Bible translations: Approaches.

As Hebrew and Greek, the original languages of the Bible, have idioms and concepts not easily translated, there is an on going critical tension about whether it is better to give a word for word translation or to give a translation that gives a parallel idiom in the target language. For instance, in the English language Catholic translation, the New American Bible, as well as the Protestant translations of the Christian Bible, translations like the King James Version, the New Revised Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible are seen as literal translations (or "word for word"), whereas translations like the New International Version and New Living Version attempt to give relevant parallel idioms. The Living Bible and The Message are two paraphrases of the Bible that try to convey the original meaning in contemporary language. The further away one gets from word to word translation, the text becomes easier to read while relying more on the theological, linguistic or cultural understanding of the translator, which one would not normally expect a lay reader to require.

Inclusive language

Traditionally, English masculine pronouns have been used interchangeably to refer to the male gender and to all people. For instance, "All men are mortal" is not intended to imply that males are mortal but females are immortal. English language readers and hearers have had to interpret masculine pronouns (and such words as "man" and "mankind") based on context. Further, both Hebrew and Greek, like some of the Latin-origin languages, use the male gender of nouns and pronouns to refer to groups that contain both sexes. This creates some difficulty in determining whether a noun or pronoun should be translated using terms that refer to men only, or generically to men and women inclusively. Context sometimes, but not always, helps determine whether to decode them in a gender-insensitive or gender-specific way.

Contemporary language has changed in many cases to reflect criticism of the use of the masculine gender, which has been characterized as discriminatory. Current style guides, such as APA, MLA, NCTE, and others, have published statements encouraging, and in some cases requiring, the use of inclusive language, which avoids language this approach regards as sexist or class-distinctive.

Until recently, virtually all English translations of the Bible have used masculine nouns and pronouns both specifically (to refer to males) and generically (when the reference is not necessarily gender-specific). Recent examples of translations which incorporate gender-inclusive language include the New Revised Standard Version, the Revised English Bible, and Today's New International Version.

Comparison of Traditional vs Gender-Inclusive Translations of Rom. 12:6-8 Original New International Version Today's New International Version

We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully. We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

The introduction of chapters and verses

Main article: Chapters and verses of the Bible

See Tanakh for the Jewish textual tradition.

The Hebrew Masoretic text contains verse endings as an important feature. According to the Talmudic tradition, the verse endings are of ancient origin. The Masoretic textual tradition also contains section endings called parashiyot, which are indicated by a space within a line (a "closed" section") or a new line beginning (an "open" section). The division of the text reflected in the parashiyot is usually thematic. The parashiyot are not numbered.

In early manuscripts (most importantly in Tiberian Masoretic manuscripts, such as the Aleppo codex) an "open" section may also be represented by a blank line, and a "closed" section by a new line that is slightly indented (the preceding line may also not be full). These latter conventions are no longer used in Torah scrolls and printed Hebrew Bibles. In this system the one rule differentiating "open" and "closed" sections is that "open" sections must always begin at the beginning of a new line, while "closed" sections never start at the beginning of a new line.

Another related feature of the Masoretic text is the division of the sedarim. This division is not thematic, but is almost entirely based upon the quantity of text.

The Byzantines also introduced a chapter division of sorts, called Kephalaia. It is not identical to the present chapters.

The current division of the Bible into chapters and the verse numbers within the chapters has no basis in any ancient textual tradition. Rather, they are medieval Christian inventions. They were later adopted by many Jews as well, as technical references within the Hebrew text. Such technical references became crucial to medieval rabbis in the historical context of forced debates with Christian clergy (who used the chapter and verse numbers), especially in late medieval Spain.[25] Chapter divisions were first used by Jews in a 1330 manuscript and for a printed edition in 1516. However, for the past generation, most Jewish editions of the complete Hebrew Bible have made a systematic effort to relegate chapter and verse numbers to the margins of the text.

The division of the Bible into chapters and verses has often elicited severe criticism from traditionalists and modern scholars alike. Critics charge that the text is often divided into chapters in an incoherent way, or at inappropriate rhetorical points, and that it encourages citing passages out of context, in effect turning the Bible into a kind of textual quarry for clerical citations. Nevertheless, the chapter divisions and verse numbers have become indispensable as technical references for Bible study.

Stephen Langton is reputed to have been the first to put the chapter divisions into a Vulgate edition of the Bible, in 1205. They were then inserted into Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in the 1400s. Robert Estienne (Robert Stephanus) was the first to number the verses within each chapter, his verse numbers entering printed editions in 1551 (New Testament) and 1571 (Hebrew Bible).[26][27]

Textual criticism

Main articles: Biblical criticism and Criticism of the Bible.

Textual criticism refers to the investigation of the Bible as a text, and addresses questions such as authorship, dates of composition, and authorial intention.

Early criticism

The traditional view of the Mosaic authorship of the Torah came under sporadic criticism from medieval scholars including Isaac ibn Yashush, Abraham ibn Ezra, Bonfils of Damascus and bishop Tostatus of Avila, who pointed to passages such as the description of the death of Moses in Deuteronomy as evidence that some portions, at least, could not have been written by Moses. In the 17th century Thomas Hobbes collected the current evidence and became the first scholar to conclude outright that Moses could not have written the bulk of the Torah. Shortly afterwards the philosopher Baruch Spinoza published a unified critical analysis, demonstrating that the problematic passages were not isolated cases that could be explained away one by one, but pervasive throughout the five books, concluding that it was "clearer than the sun at noon that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses…." Despite determined opposition from the Church, both Catholic and Protestant, the views of Hobbes and Spinoza gained increasing acceptance amongst scholars.

The documentary hypothesis

Scholars intrigued by the hypothesis that Moses had not written the Pentateuch considered other authors. Independent but nearly simultaneous proposals by H. B. Witter, Jean Astruc, and J. G. Eichhorn separated the Pentateuch into two original documentary components, both dating from after the time of Moses. Others hypothesized the presence of two additional sources. The four documents were given working titles: J (or Yahwist), E (Elohist), P (Priestly), and D (Deuteronomist), each was discernible by its own characteristic language, and each, when read in isolation, presented a unified, coherent narrative.

Subsequent scholars, notably Eduard Reuss, Karl Heinrich Graf and Wilhelm Vatke, turned their attention to the order in which the documents had been composed (which they deduced from internal clues) and placed them in the context of a theory of the development of ancient Israelite religion, suggesting that much of the Laws and the narrative of the Pentateuch were unknown to the Israelites in the time of Moses. These were synthesized by Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), who suggested a historical framework for the composition of the documents and their redaction (combination) into the final document known as the Pentateuch. This hypothesis was challenged by William Henry Green in his The Mosaic Origins of the Pentateuchal Codes (available online). Nonetheless, according to contemporary Torah scholar Richard Elliott Friedman, Wellhausen's model of the documentary hypothesis continues to dominate the field of biblical scholarship: "To this day, if you want to disagree, you disagree with Wellhausen. If you want to pose a new model, you compare its merits with those of Wellhausen's model."[28]

The documentary hypothesis is important in the field of biblical studies not only because it claims that the Torah was written by different people at different times—generally long after the events it describes—[29] but it also proposed what was at the time a radically new way of reading the Bible. Many proponents of the documentary hypothesis view the Bible more as a body of literature than a work of history, believing that the historical value of the text lies not in its account of the events that it describes, but in what critics can infer about the times in which the authors lived (as critics may read Hamlet to learn about seventeenth-century England, but will not read it to learn about seventh-century Denmark).

Modern developments

The critical analysis of authorship now encompasses every book of the Bible. Every book in turn has been hypothesized to bear traces of multiple authorship[citation needed], even the book of Obadiah[citation needed], which is only a single page. In some cases the traditional view on authorship has been overturned; in others, additional support, at least in part has been found.

The development of the hypothesis has not stopped with Wellhausen. Wellhausen's hypothesis, for example, proposed that the four documents were composed in the order J-E-D-P, with P, containing the bulk of the Jewish law, dating from the post-Exilic Second Temple period (i.e., after 515 BC);[30] but the contemporary view is that P is earlier than D, and that all four books date from the First Temple period (i.e., prior to 587 BC).[31] The documentary hypothesis has more recently been refined by later scholars such as Martin Noth (who in 1943 provided evidence that Deuteronomy plus the following six books make a unified history from the hand of a single editor), Harold Bloom, Frank Moore Cross and Richard Elliot Friedman.

The documentary hypothesis, at least in the four-document version advanced by Wellhausen, has been controversial since its formulation. The direction of this criticism is to question the existence of separate, identifiable documents, positing instead that the biblical text is made up of almost innumerable strands so interwoven as to be hardly untangleable—the J document, in particular, has been subjected to such intense dissection that it seems in danger of disappearing.

Although biblical archeology has confirmed the existence of many people, places, and events mentioned in the Bible, many critical scholars have argued that the Bible be read not as an accurate historical document, but rather as a work of literature and theology that often draws on historical events—as well as upon non-Hebrew mythology—as primary source material. For these scholars, the Bible reveals much about the lives and times of its authors and compilers. The relevance of these ideas to contemporary religious life is left to clerics and adherents of contemporary religions to decide.

Theological responses

Judaism

The claim that the Torah—"the Five Books of Moses"—were not written by Moses, but by many authors long after Moses was said to have lived, directly challenged Jewish orthodoxy. For most, this claim implies that the Torah itself—especially its account of God's revelation at Mt. Sinai—is not historically reliable. Although many Orthodox scholars have rejected this "Higher Criticism", most Conservative and virtually all Reform Jewish scholars have accepted it. Consequently, there has been considerable debate among Jewish scholars as to the nature of revelation and the divine nature of the Torah. Conservative Jewish philosopher Elliot Dorff has categorized five distinct major Jewish positions in these debates within Conservative Judaism in the 20th century[32]:

* Orthodox (characterized by Eliezer Berkovitz and Norman Lamm): "Verbal Revelation: The Torah, including both the Written and Oral Traditions, consists of the exact words of God. He gave it all as one piece at Sinai."*

* Conservative I (characterized by Isaac Lesser, Alexander Kohut, Abraham Joshua Heschel, and David Novak): "Continuous Revelation:God dictated His will at Sinai and other times. It was written down by human beings, however, and hence the diverse traditions in the Bible."

* Conservative II (characterized by Ben Zion Bokser, Robert Gordis, Max Routtenberg and Emil Fackenheim): "Continuous Revelation: Human beings wrote the Torah, but they were divinely inspired."

* Conservative III (characterized by Louis Jacobs, Seymour Seigel, Jacob Agus, David Lieber and Elliot Dorff): "Continuous Revelation: The Torah is the human record of the concounter between God and the People Israel at Sinai. Since it was written by human beings, it contains some laws and ideas which we find repugnant today."

* Conservative IV/Reconstructionist (characterized by Mordecai Kaplan, Ira Eisenstein and Harold Schulweis): "No Revelation: Human beings wrote the Torah. No claim for divinity of the product."

In addition to the 5 categories described by Elliott, other positions have been adopted:

* Traditional Rabbi David Weiss HaLivni, the founder of the Union for Traditional Judaism, adapted a position he describes as chatu yisrael ("Israel sinned"), that God revealed the Torah to Moses on Mount Sinai but it subsequently became corrupted and lost, and Ezra restored it by redacting it from multiple manuscripts reflecting disparate traditions. Under this view, the Torah is the best available record of the Divine will, has prophetic commendation, and is binding on the Jewish people, but is not necessarily entirely free of disparaties. [33]

* Reform (characterized by the Movement's 1937 Guiding Principles): "Progressive revelation: The Torah is God's will written by human beings. As time goes on, we get to understand his will better and better (="progressive revelation").

* Reconstructionist Reconstructionist Judaism generally adapts the textual critical approach in toto and regards the Torah as either inspired rather than revealed, or an entirely human product rather than the product of an external God.

Christianity

In 1943 pope Pius XII's encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu gave the Vatican's imprimatur to textual criticism.

Archaeological and historical research

Main article: Biblical Archaeology

According to recent theories, linguistic as well as archaeological, the global structure of the texts in the Hebrew Bible were compiled during the reign of King Josiah in the 7th Century BC. Even though the components are derived from more ancient writings, the final form of the books is believed to have been set somewhere between the 1st Century BC and the 4th Century AD.

With regard to the Exodus and the 40-year sojourn in the desert, archaeological digs in possible Biblical locations have been unsuccessful so far. There is also no archaeological evidence of a conquest of the land and cities of Canaan of the kind recounted in the Book of Joshua.

However, after the split of the Kingdom of Israel in the second half of the 9th Century BC, archaeological findings fit the Biblical chronology.

Nomadist theory

The ancestors of the Hebrews and the Jews are believed to be either nomads who have become sedentary, or people from the plains of Canaan, who fled to the highlands to escape the control of the cities. These positions are held by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman in The Bible Unearthed, by the American archaeologist William Dever in Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come from?, and by Jean-Marie Husser, professor at Marc Bloch University in Strasbourg, France.

See also

Bible Portal

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

Bible

Look up Bible in

Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Bible

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

The Bible and Works about the Bible

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

1911 Britannica entry

Biblical analysis

* Bible chronology

* Bible citation

* Bible prophecy

* Bible translations

* Biblical canon

* Bibliomancy is the use of random readings from a book for divination. In Jewish and Christian cultures, the Bible is often used.

* Books of the Bible

* Lost books of the Bible

* New Testament view on Jesus' life

* Parsha

* Ritual Decalogue

* Study Bible

* Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture

* Ten Commandments

Perspectives on the Bible

* Calvin's view of Scripture

* Jewish Biblical exegesis

* Islamic view of the Bible

* Biblical narratives and the Qur'an

History and the Bible

* The Bible and history

* History of the English Bible

* English Translations of the Bible

Biblical scholarship and analysis

* Bible Translations

* Biblical archaeology

* Dating the Bible

* Bible conspiracy theory

* Biblical literalism

* Biblical inerrancy

* Internal consistency and the Bible

* Bible scientific foreknowledge

* Criticism of the Bible

* Animals in the Bible

* Alcohol in the Bible

* Bibliolatry

* Old Testament: Timeline

Bible societies

* See Bible society for a list.

Commentaries

See Biblical exegesis

Notes and references

1. ^ Dictionary.com

2. ^ See Patrick H. Alexander The SBL Handbook of Style. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers. ISBN 1-56563-487-X.

3. ^ http://www.pcusa.org/101/101-bible.htm

4. ^ Bible Society stats.

5. ^ Online Etymology Dictionary entry for word "Bible"

6. ^ "From Hebrew Bible to Christian Bible" by Mark Hamilton on PBS's site From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians

7. ^ Dictionary.com etymology of the word "Bible"

8. ^ Bible Study, Bible Facts (HTML). Retrieved on 2007-11-05.

9. ^ Karen Jobes and Moises Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint ISBN 1-84227-061-3, (Paternoster Press, 2001). - The current standard for Introductory works on the Septuagint.

10. ^ Jennifer M. Dines, The Septuagint, Michael A. Knibb, Ed., London: T&T Clark, 2004

11. ^ a b Menachem Cohen, The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism in HaMikrah V'anachnu, ed. Uriel Simon, HaMachon L'Yahadut U'Machshava Bat-Z'mananu and Dvir, Tel-Aviv, 1979

12. ^ Metzger, Bruce R. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography (Oxford University Press, 1981) cf. Papyrus 52

13. ^ A Summary of the Bible by Lewis, CS: Believer's Web.

14. ^ Philo of Alexandria, De vita Moysis 3.23.

15. ^ Josephus, Contra Apion 1.8.

16. ^ "Basis for belief of Inspiration". Biblegateway.

17. ^ Norman L. Geisler, William E. Nix (1986). A General Introduction to the Bible. Moody Publishers, 86. ISBN 0-8024-2916-5.

18. ^ for example, seeLeroy Zuck, Roy B. Zuck (1991). Basic Bible Interpretation. Chariot Victor Pub, 68. ISBN 0-89693-819-0.

19. ^ Roy B. Zuck, Donald Campbell (2002). Basic Bible Interpretation. Victor. ISBN 0-7814-3877-2.

20. ^ Norman L. Geisler (1979, 1980). Inerrancy. The Zondervan Corporation, 294. ISBN 0-310-39281-0.

21. ^ International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (1978). "The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" (pdf). International Council on Biblical Inerrancy.

22. ^ a b c Stagg, Frank. New Testament Theology. Nashville: Broadman, 1962. ISBN 0805416137

23. ^ Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament (HTML). Retrieved on 2007-11-05.

24. ^ www.vision2025.org

25. ^ see Spanish Inquisition

26. ^ Chapters and Verses.

27. ^ The Examiner.

28. ^ Richard Elliott Friedman, "Who Wrote the Bible?," HarperSanFrancisco, 1997 (2nd edition).

29. ^ Joel Rosenberg, 1984 "The Bible: Biblical Narrative" in Barry Holtz, ed Back to the Sources New York: Summit Books p. 36; Nahum Sarna, 1986 Understanding Genesis New York:Schocken Books p. xxi-xxiii

30. ^ Wellhausen adopted the idea of a post-Exilic date for P from Eduard Reuss.

31. ^ Although the bulk of all four documents date from before 587 BCE, the strand of D known as Dtr2 dates from the following Exilic period.

32. ^ Elliot Dorff 1978 Conservative Judaism: Our Ancestors to Our Descendents New York: United Synagogue Youth pp. 114-115

33. ^ Rabbi David Weiss HaLivni, Revelation Restored: Divine Writ and Critical Responses. Westview Press, 2001. ISBN 978-0813333472

* Anderson, Bernhard W. Understanding the Old Testament. ISBN 0-13-948399-3.

* Berlin, Adele, Marc Zvi Brettler and Michael Fishbane. The Jewish Study Bible. Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-529751-2.

* Asimov, Isaac. Asimov's Guide to the Bible. New York, NY: Avenel Books, 1981. ISBN 0-517-34582-X.

* Dever, William G. Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did they Come from? Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003. ISBN 0-8028-0975-8.

* Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why New York, NY: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005. ISBN 0-06-073817-0.

* Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil A. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001. ISBN 0-684-86913-6.

* Geisler, Norman (editor). Inerrancy. Sponsored by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. Zondervan Publishing House, 1980, ISBN 0-310-39281-0.

* Head, Tom. The Absolute Beginner's Guide to the Bible. Indianapolis, IN: Que Publishing, 2005. ISBN 0-7897-3419-2.

* Hoffman, Joel M. In the Beginning. New York University Press, 2004. ISBN 0-8147-3690-4.

* Lindsell, Harold. The Battle for the Bible. Zondervan Publishing House, 1978. ISBN 0-310-27681-0.

* Lienhard, Joseph T. The Bible, The Church, and Authority. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995.

* Miller, John W. The Origins of the Bible: Rethinking Canon History Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1994. ISBN 0-8091-3522-1.

* Riches, John. The Bible: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2000. ISBN 0-19-285343-0

* Taylor, Hawley O. "Mathematics and Prophecy." Modern Science and Christian Faith. Wheaton: Van Kampen, 1948, pp. 175–83.

* Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, s.vv. "Book of Ezekiel," p. 580 and "prophecy," p. 1410. Chicago: Moody Bible Press, 1986.

 

[matuski]

But what do you guys think of this?

Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia •

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Bible (disambiguation).

Part of a series on

The Bible

Biblical canon

* Chapters and verses of the Bible

* Hebrew Bible/Tanakh

* Torah

* Prophets

* Writings

* Old Testament

* Deuterocanonicals

* New Testament

* Antilegomena

Bible translations

* English translations of the Bible

Research

* Biblical manuscript

* Documentary hypothesis

* Biblical narratives and the Qur'an

Views

* Biblical inerrancy

* Criticism of the Bible

This box: view • talk • edit

The Bible is

* Part of Category:Judaism

(see The Hebrew Bible below)

* Part of a series on Christianity

(see The New Testament below)

The word Bible refers to the canonical collections of religious writings or books of Judaism and Christianity.[1] Books included as canon in the Bible vary according to these religious traditions and among their denominations. These variations reflect a range of histories, traditions and myths.

The Jewish version of the Bible, the Tanakh, includes the books common to both the Christian and Jewish biblical canons.[2] The Torah is traditionally considered by believers to be God's direct words and thus thought to be the most sacred part. Much of the Jewish religious law is derived from the Torah.

The Christian version of the Bible is often called the Holy Bible, Scriptures, or Word of God. It divides the books of the Bible into two parts: the books of the Old Testament primarily sourced from the Tanakh (with some variations), and the 27 books of the New Testament containing books originally written primarily in Greek.[3] Some versions of the Christian Bible have a separate Apocrypha section for the books not considered canonical by the publisher. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Old Testament canons contain books not found in the Tanakh, but that are found in the Greek Septuagint, the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

The Bible, or some portion of it, had been translated into more than 2,300 languages or dialects as of 2003.[4]

Contents

[hide]

* 1 Etymology

* 2 Tanakh

o 2.1 Torah

o 2.2 Nevi'im

o 2.3 Ketuvim

o 2.4 Hebrew Bible translations and editions

* 3 The two Torahs of Rabbinic Judaism

* 4 The Old Testament

o 4.1 Differing Christian usages of the Old Testament

* 5 The New Testament

o 5.1 Original language

o 5.2 Historic editions

* 6 Christian theology

* 7 The canonization of the Bible

o 7.1 Canonization of the Hebrew Bible

o 7.2 Canonization of the Old Testament and New Testament

o 7.3 Ethiopian Orthodox canon

* 8 Bible versions and translations

o 8.1 Important characteristics of early Bible texts

o 8.2 Differences in Bible translations

o 8.3 Inclusive language

o 8.4 The introduction of chapters and verses

* 9 Textual criticism

o 9.1 Early criticism

o 9.2 The documentary hypothesis

o 9.3 Modern developments

o 9.4 Theological responses

+ 9.4.1 Judaism

+ 9.4.2 Christianity

* 10 Archaeological and historical research

o 10.1 Nomadist theory

* 11 See also

o 11.1 Biblical analysis

o 11.2 Perspectives on the Bible

o 11.3 History and the Bible

o 11.4 Biblical scholarship and analysis

o 11.5 Bible societies

o 11.6 Commentaries

* 12 Notes and references

* 13 External links

o 13.1 Wikis

Etymology

An American family Bible dating to 1859.

An American family Bible dating to 1859.

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word bible[5] is from Anglo-Latin biblia, traced from the same word through Medieval Latin and Late Latin, as used in the phrase biblia sacra ("holy books"). This stemmed from the term (Greek: τὰ βιβλία τὰ ἅγια Ta biblia ta hagia, "the holy books"), which derived from biblion ("paper" or "scroll," the ordinary word for "book"), which was originally a diminutive of byblos ("Egyptian papyrus"), possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician port Byblos from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece.

Biblical scholar Mark Hamilton states that the Greek phrase Ta biblia ("the books") was "an expression Hellenistic Jews used to describe their sacred books several centuries before the time of Jesus,"[6] and would have referred to the Septuagint.[7] The Online Etymology Dictionary states, "The Christian scripture was referred to in Greek as Ta Biblia as early as c.223."

Tanakh

Main article: Tanakh

The Tanakh (Hebrew: תנ"ך) consists of 24 books. Tanakh is an acronym for the three parts of the Hebrew Bible: the Torah ("Teaching/Law" also known as the Pentateuch), Nevi'im ("Prophets"), and Ketuvim ("Writings," or Hagiographa), and is used commonly by Jews but unfamiliar to many English speakers and others (Alexander 1999, p. 17). (See Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture).

Torah

Main article: Torah

The Torah, or "Instruction," is also known as the "Five Books" of Moses, thus Chumash from Hebrew meaning "fivesome," and Pentateuch from Greek meaning "five scroll-cases."

Part of a series on

Judaism

Judaism

Portal | Category

Jews · Judaism · Denominations

Orthodox · Conservative · Reform

Haredi · Hasidic · Modern Orthodox

Reconstructionist · Renewal · Rabbinic

Karaite · Samaritanism

Jewish philosophy

Principles of faith · Minyan · Kabbalah

Noahide laws · God · Eschatology · Messiah

Chosenness · Holocaust · Halakha · Kashrut

Modesty · Tzedakah · Ethics · Mussar

Religious texts

Torah · Tanakh · Talmud · Midrash · Tosefta

Rabbinic works · Kuzari · Mishneh Torah

Tur · Shulchan Aruch · Mishnah Berurah

Ḥumash · Siddur · Piyutim · Zohar · Tanya

Holy cities

Jerusalem · Safed · Hebron · Tiberias

Important figures

Abraham · Isaac · Jacob/Israel

Sarah · Rebecca · Rachel · Leah

Moses · Deborah · Ruth · David · Solomon

Elijah · Hillel · Shammai · Judah the Prince

Saadia Gaon · Rashi · Rif · Ibn Ezra · Tosafists

Rambam · Ramban · Gersonides

Yosef Albo · Yosef Karo · Rabbeinu Asher

Baal Shem Tov · Alter Rebbe · Vilna Gaon

Leopold Zunz · Israel Jacobson · Abraham Geiger

Ovadia Yosef · Moshe Feinstein · Elazar Shach

Lubavitcher Rebbe

Jewish life cycle

Brit · Bar/Bat Mitzvah · Shidduch · Marriage

Niddah · Naming · Pidyon HaBen · Bereavement

Religious roles

Rabbi · Rebbe · Hazzan

Kohen/Priest · Mashgiach · Gabbai · Maggid

Mohel · Beth din · Rosh yeshiva

Religious buildings

Synagogue · Mikvah · Holy Temple / Tabernacle

Religious articles

Tallit · Tefillin · Kipa · Sefer Torah

Tzitzit · Mezuzah · Menorah · Shofar

4 Species · Kittel · Gartel · Yad

Jewish prayers

Jewish services · Shema · Amidah · Aleinu

Kol Nidre · Kaddish · Hallel · Ma Tovu · Havdalah

Judaism & other religions

Christianity · Islam · Catholicism · Reconciliation

Abrahamic faiths · Judeo-Paganism · Pluralism

Mormonism · "Judeo-Christian" · Others

Related topics

Criticism of Judaism · Zionism

Antisemitism · Philo-Semitism · Yeshiva

v • d • e

The Torah comprises the following five books:

* 1. Genesis, Ge—Bere#### (בראשית)

* 2. Exodus, Ex—Shemot (שמות)

* 3. Leviticus, Le—Vayikra (ויקרא)

* 4. Numbers, Nu—Bamidbar (במדבר)

* 5. Deuteronomy, Dt—Devarim (דברים)

The Hebrew book titles come from the first words in the respective texts. The Hebrew title for Numbers, however, comes from the fifth word of that text.

The Torah focuses on three moments in the changing relationship between God and people. The first eleven chapters of Genesis provide accounts of the creation (or ordering) of the world, and the history of God's early relationship with humanity. The remaining thirty-nine chapters of Genesis provide an account of God's covenant with the Hebrew patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (also called Israel), and Jacob's children (the "Children of Israel"), especially Joseph. It tells of how God commanded Abraham to leave his family and home in the city of Ur, eventually to settle in the land of Canaan, and how the Children of Israel later moved to Egypt. The remaining four books of the Torah tell the story of Moses, who lived hundreds of years after the patriarchs. His story coincides with the story of the liberation of the Children of Israel from slavery in Ancient Egypt, to the renewal of their covenant with God at Mount Sinai, and their wanderings in the desert until a new generation would be ready to enter the land of Canaan. The Torah ends with the death of Moses.

Traditionally, the Torah contains the 613 mitzvot, or commandments, of God, revealed during the passage from slavery in the land of Egypt to freedom in the land of Canaan. These commandments provide the basis for Halakha (Jewish religious law).

The Torah is divided into fifty-four portions which are read in turn in Jewish liturgy, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Deuteronomy, each Sabbath. The cycle ends and recommences at the end of Sukkot, which is called Simchat Torah.

Nevi'im

Main article: Nevi'im

The Nevi'im, or "Prophets," tell the story of the rise of the Hebrew monarchy, its division into two kingdoms, and the prophets who, in God's name, warned the kings and the Children of Israel about the punishement of God. It ends with the conquest of the Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians and the conquest of the Kingdom of Judah by the Babylonians, and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Portions of the prophetic books are read by Jews on the Sabbath (Shabbat). The Book of Jonah is read on Yom Kippur.

According to Jewish tradition, Nevi'im is divided into eight books. Contemporary translations subdivide these into seventeen books.

The Nevi'im comprise the following eight books:

* 6. Joshua, Js—Yehoshua (יהושע)

* 7. Judges, Jg—Shoftim (שופטים)

* 8. Samuel, includes First and Second, 1Sa–2Sa—Shemuel (שמואל)

* 9. Kings, includes First and Second, 1Ki–2Ki—Melakhim (מלכים)

* 10. Isaiah, Is—Yeshayahu (ישעיהו)

* 11. Jeremiah, Je—Yirmiyahu (ירמיהו)

* 12. Ezekiel, Ez—Yekhezkel (יחזקאל)

* 13. Twelve, includes all Minor Prophets—Tre Asar (תרי עשר)

o a. Hosea, Ho—Hoshea (הושע)

o b. Joel, Jl—Yoel (יואל)

o c. Amos, Am—Amos (עמוס)

o d. Obadiah, Ob—Ovadyah (עבדיה)

o e. Jonah, Jh—Yonah (יונה)

o f. Micah, Mi—Mikhah (מיכה)

o g. Nahum, Na—Nahum (נחום)

o h. Habakkuk, Hb—Havakuk (חבקוק)

o i. Zephaniah, Zp—Tsefanya (צפניה)

o j. Haggai, Hg—Khagay (חגי)

o k. Zechariah, Zc—Zekharyah (זכריה)

o l. Malachi, Ml—Malakhi (מלאכי)

Ketuvim

Main article: Ketuvim

The Ketuvim, or "Writings" or "Scriptures," may have been written during or after the Babylonian Exile but no one can be sure. According to Rabbinic tradition, many of the psalms in the book of Psalms are attributed to David; King Solomon is believed to have written Song of Songs in his youth, Proverbs at the prime of his life, and Ecclesiastes at old age; and the prophet Jeremiah is thought to have written Lamentations. The Book of Ruth is the only biblical book that centers entirely on a non-Jew. The book of Ruth tells the story of a non-Jew (specifically, a Moabite) who married a Jew and, upon his death, followed in the ways of the Jews; according to the Bible, she was the great-grandmother of King David. Five of the books, called "The Five Scrolls" (Megilot), are read on Jewish holidays: Song of Songs on Passover; the Book of Ruth on Shavuot; Lamentations on the Ninth of Av; Ecclesiastes on Sukkot; and the Book of Esther on Purim. Collectively, the Ketuvim contain lyrical poetry, philosophical reflections on life, and the stories of the prophets and other Jewish leaders during the Babylonian exile. It ends with the Persian decree allowing Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple.

The Ketuvim comprise the following eleven books:

* 14. Psalms, Ps—Tehillim (תהלים)

* 15. Proverbs, Pr—Mishlei (משלי)

* 16. Job, Jb—Iyyov (איוב)

* 17. Song of Songs, So—Shir ha-Shirim (שיר השירים)

* 18. Ruth, Ru—Rut (רות)

* 19. Lamentations, La—Eikhah (איכה), also called Kinot (קינות)

* 20. Ecclesiastes, Ec—Kohelet (קהלת)

* 21. Esther, Es—Ester (אסתר)

* 22. Daniel, Dn—Daniel (דניאל)

* 23. Ezra, Ea, includes Nehemiah, Ne—Ezra (עזרא), includes Nehemiah (נחמיה)

* 24. Chronicles, includes First and Second, 1Ch–2Ch—Divrei ha-Yamim (דברי הימים), also called Divrei (דברי)

Hebrew Bible translations and editions

Main article: Bible translations

The Tanakh was mainly written in biblical Hebrew, with some portions (notably in Daniel and Ezra) in Aramaic.[8]

Some time in the 2nd or 3rd century BCE, the Torah was translated into Koine Greek, and over the next century, other books were translated (or composed) as well. This translation became known as the Septuagint and was widely used by Greek-speaking Jews, and later by Christians.[9] It differs somewhat from the later standardized Hebrew (Masoretic Text). This translation was promoted by way of a legend that seventy separate translators all produced identical texts.[10]

From the 800s to the 1400s, Jewish scholars today known as Masoretes compared the text of all known biblical manuscripts in an effort to create a unified, standardized text. A series of highly similar texts eventually emerged, and any of these texts are known as Masoretic Texts (MT). The Masoretes also added vowel points (called niqqud) to the text, since the original text only contained consonant letters. This sometimes required the selection of an interpretation, since some words differ only in their vowels—their meaning can vary in accordance with the vowels chosen. In antiquity, variant Hebrew readings existed, some of which have survived in the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea scrolls, and other ancient fragments, as well as being attested in ancient versions in other languages.[11]

Versions of the Septuagint contain several passages and whole books beyond what was included in the Masoretic texts of the Tanakh. In some cases these additions were originally composed in Greek, while in other cases they are translations of Hebrew books or variants not present in the Masoretic texts. Recent discoveries have shown that more of the Septuagint additions have a Hebrew origin than was once thought. While there are no complete surviving manuscripts of the Hebrew texts on which the Septuagint was based, many scholars believe that they represent a different textual tradition ("Vorlage") from the one that became the basis for the Masoretic texts.[11]

Jews also produced non-literal translations or paraphrases known as targums, primarily in Aramaic. They frequently expanded on the text with additional details taken from Rabbinic oral tradition.

The two Torahs of Rabbinic Judaism

By the Hellenistic period of Jewish history, Jews were divided over the nature of the Torah. Some (for example, the Sadducees) believed that the Chumash contained the entire Torah, that is, the entire contents of what God revealed to Moses at Sinai and in the desert. Others, principally the Pharisees, believed that the Chumash represented only that portion of the revelation that had been written down (i.e., the Written Torah or the Written Law), but that the rest of God's revelation had been passed down orally (thus composing the Oral Law or Oral Torah). Orthodox and Masorti and Conservative Judaism state that the Talmud contains some of the Oral Torah. Reform Judaism also gives credence to the Talmud containing the Oral Torah, but, as with the written Torah, asserts that both were inspired by, but not dictated by, God.

The Old Testament

The Old Testament, is the collection of books written prior to the life of Jesus, but accepted by Christians as scripture. Broadly speaking, it is the same as the Hebrew Bible, however it divides and orders them differently, and varies from Judaism in interpretation and emphasis. Several Christian denominations also incorporate additional books into their canons of the Old Testament. A few groups consider particular translations to be divinely inspired, notably the Septuagint and the King James Version.

Differing Christian usages of the Old Testament

The Septuagint (Greek translation, from Alexandria in Egypt under the Ptolemies) was generally abandoned in favour of the Masoretic text as the basis for translations of the Old Testament into Western languages from Martin Luther's Protestant Bible to the present day; already Jerome's Vulgate was based on the Hebrew. In Eastern Christianity, translations based on the Septuagint still prevail. Some modern Western translations make use of the Septuagint to clarify passages in the Masoretic text, where the Septuagint may preserve a variant reading of the Hebrew text. They also sometimes adopt variants that appear in texts discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

A number of books which are part of the Greek Septuagint but are not found in the Hebrew (Rabbinic) Bible are often referred to as deuterocanonical books by Catholics referring to a later secondary (i.e., deutero) canon. Most Protestants term these books as apocrypha. Evangelicals and those of the Modern Protestant traditions do not accept the deuterocanonical books as canonical, although Protestant Bibles included them until around the 1820s. However, the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox Churches include these books as part of their Old Testament. The Catholic Church recognizes seven such books (Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch), as well as some passages in Esther and Daniel. Various Orthodox Churches include a few others, typically 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, Odes, Psalms of Solomon, and the Prayer of Manasseh. The Anglican Church uses the Apocryphal books liturgically, but not to establish doctrine. Therefore, editions of the Bible intended for use in the Anglican Church include these books, plus 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh.

The New Testament

Main article: New Testament

The Bible as used by the majority of Christians includes the Rabbinic Hebrew Scripture and the New Testament, which relates the life and teachings of Jesus, the letters of the Apostle Paul and other disciples to the early church and the Book of Revelation.

Part of a series of articles on

Christianity

Christian cross

Jesus Christ

Virgin birth · Resurrection

Foundations

Church · New Covenant

Apostles · Kingdom · Gospel

History of Christianity · Timeline

Bible

Old Testament · New Testament

Books · Canon · Apocrypha

Septuagint · Decalogue

Sermon on the Mount

Great Commission

Translations (English)

Inspiration · Hermeneutics

Christian theology

Monotheism

Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

History of · Theology · Apologetics

Creation · Fall of Man · Covenant · Law

Grace · Faith · Justification · Salvation

Sanctification · Theosis · Worship

Church · Sacraments · Eschatology

Dispensationalism · Covenant Theology

New Covenant Theology

History and traditions

Early · Councils · Creeds · Missions

Great Schism · Crusades · Reformation

Great Awakenings · Great Apostasy

Restorationism · Nontrinitarianism

Thomism · Arminianism

Congregationalism

[show]Eastern Christianity

Eastern Orthodox · Oriental Orthodox · Syriac Christianity · Eastern Catholic

[show]Western Christianity

Western Catholicism · Protestantism · Anabaptism · Lutheranism · Calvinism · Anglicanism · Baptist · Methodism · Evangelicalism · Fundamentalism · Unitarianism · Liberalism · Pentecostalism · Christian Science · Unity Church · Oneness Pentecostalism

[show]Restorationism

Adventism · Christadelphians · Jehovah's Witnesses · Latter-day Saint movement (Mormonism)

Topics in Christianity

Movements · Denominations

Ecumenism · Relation to other religions

Preaching · Prayer

Music · Liturgy · Calendar

Symbols · Art · Criticism

Important figures

Apostle Paul · Church Fathers

Constantine · Athanasius · Augustine

Anselm · Aquinas · Palamas

Luther · Calvin · Wesley

Arius · Marcion of Sinope

Archbishop of Canterbury · Pope

Coptic Pope · Ecumenical Patriarch

Christianity Portal

This box: view • talk • edit

The New Testament is a collection of 27 books, of 4 different genres of Christian literature (Gospels, one account of the Acts of the Apostles, Epistles and an Apocalypse). Jesus is its central figure. The New Testament was written primarily in Koine Greek in the early Christian period. Nearly all Christians recognize the New Testament (as stated below) as canonical scripture. These books can be grouped into:

The Gospels

* Synoptic Gospels

o Gospel According to Matthew, Mt

o Gospel According to Mark, Mk

o Gospel According to Luke, Lk

* Gospel According to John, Jn

* Acts of the Apostles, Ac (continues Luke)

Pauline Epistles

* Epistle to the Romans, Ro

* First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1Co

* Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2Co

* Epistle to the Galatians, Ga

* Epistle to the Ephesians, Ep

* Epistle to the Philippians, Pp

* Epistle to the Colossians, Cl

* First Epistle to the Thessalonians, 1Th

* Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, 2Th

* Pastoral Epistles

o First Epistle to Timothy, 1Ti

o Second Epistle to Timothy, 2Ti

o Epistle to Titus, Tt

* Epistle to Philemon, Pm

* Epistle to the Hebrews, He

General Epistles, also called Jewish Epistles

* Epistle of James, Jm

* First Epistle of Peter, 1Pe

* Second Epistle of Peter, 2Pe

* First Epistle of John, 1Jn

* Second Epistle of John, 2Jn

* Third Epistle of John, 3Jn

* Epistle of Jude, Jd

* Revelation, Re

Original language

Probably, the books of the New Testament were written in Koine Greek, the language of the earliest extant manuscripts, even though some authors often included translations from Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Certainly the Pauline Epistles were written in Greek for Greek-speaking audiences. See Greek primacy. Some scholars believe that some books of the Greek New Testament (in particular, the Gospel of Matthew) are actually translations of a Hebrew or Aramaic original. Of these, a small number accept the Syriac Pe####ta as representative of the original. See Aramaic primacy.

Historic editions

See also: Biblical manuscript and Bible translations

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at the Royal Library in Sweden.

The Codex Gigas from the 13th century, held at the Royal Library in Sweden.

When ancient scribes copied earlier books, they wrote notes on the margins of the page (marginal glosses) to correct their text—especially if a scribe accidentally omitted a word or line—and to comment about the text. When later scribes were copying the copy, they were sometimes uncertain if a note was intended to be included as part of the text. See textual criticism. Over time, different regions evolved different versions, each with its own assemblage of omissions and additions.

The autographs, the Greek manuscripts written by the original authors, have not survived. Scholars surmise the original Greek text from the versions that do survive. The three main textual traditions of the Greek New Testament are sometimes called the Alexandrian text-type (generally minimalist), the Byzantine text-type (generally maximalist), and the Western text-type (occasionally wild). Together they comprise most of the ancient manuscripts.

There are also several ancient translations, most important of which are in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic (including the Pe####ta and the Diatessaron gospel harmony), in the Ethiopian language of Ge'ez, and in Latin (both the Vetus Latina and the Vulgate).

The earliest surviving complete manuscript of the entire Bible is the Codex Amiatinus, a Latin Vulgate edition produced in eighth century England at the double monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow.

The earliest printed edition of the Greek New Testament appeared in 1516 from the Froben press, by Desiderius Erasmus, who reconstructed its Greek text from several recent manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. He occasionally added a Greek translation of the Latin Vulgate for parts that did not exist in the Greek manuscripts. He produced four later editions of this text. Erasmus was Roman Catholic, but his preference for the Byzantine Greek manuscripts rather than the Latin Vulgate led some church authorities to view him with suspicion.

The first printed edition with critical apparatus (noting variant readings among the manuscripts) was produced by the printer Robert Estienne of Paris in 1550. The Greek text of this edition and of those of Erasmus became known as the Textus Receptus (Latin for "received text"), a name given to it in the Elzevier edition of 1633, which termed it as the text nunc ab omnibus receptum ("now received by all").

The churches of the Protestant Reformation translated the Greek of the Textus Receptus to produce vernacular Bibles, such as the German Luther Bible and the English King James Bible.

The discovery of older manuscripts, which belong to the Alexandrian text-type, including the 4th-century Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, led scholars to revise their view about the original Greek text. Attempts to reconstruct the original text are called critical editions. Karl Lachmann based his critical edition of 1831 on manuscripts dating from the 4th century and earlier, to demonstrate that the Textus Receptus must be corrected according to these earlier texts.

Later critical editions incorporate ongoing scholarly research, including discoveries of Greek papyrus fragments from near Alexandria, Egypt, that date in some cases within a few decades of the original New Testament writings.[12] Today, most critical editions of the Greek New Testament, such as UBS4 and NA27, consider the Alexandrian text-type corrected by papyrii, to be the Greek text that is closest to the original autographs. Their apparatus includes the result of votes among scholars, ranging from certain {A} to doubtful {E}, on which variants best preserve the original Greek text of the New Testament.

Most variants among the manuscripts are minor, such as alternate spelling, alternate word order, the presence or absence of an optional definite article ("the"), and so on. Occasionally, a major variant happens when a portion of a text was accidentally omitted (or perhaps even censored), or was added from a marginal gloss. Fortunately, major variants tend to be easier to correct.

Critical editions that rely primarily on the Alexandrian text-type inform nearly all modern translations (and revisions of older translations).

However for reasons of tradition, especially the doctrine of the inerrancy of the King James Bible, some modern scholars prefer to use the Textus Receptus for the Greek text, or use the Majority Text which is similar to it but is a critical edition that relies on earlier manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. Among these scholars, some argue that the Byzantine tradition contains scribal additions, but these later interpolations preserve the orthodox interpretations of the biblical text—as part of the ongoing Christian experience—and in this sense are authoritative.

Christian theology

While individual books within the Christian Bible present narratives set in certain historical periods, most Christian denominations teach that the Bible itself has an overarching message.

There are among Christians wide differences of opinion as to how particular incidents as described in the Bible are to be interpreted and as to what meaning should be attached to various prophecies. However, Christians in general are in agreement as to the Bible's basic message. A general outline, as described by C.S. Lewis, is as follows:[13]

1. At some point in the past, humanity learned to depart from God's will and began to sin.

2. Because no one is free from sin, people cannot deal with God directly, so God revealed Himself in ways people could understand.

3. God called Abraham and his progeny to be the means for saving all of humanity.

4. To this end, He gave the Law to Moses.

5. The resulting nation of Israel went through cycles of sin and repentance, yet the prophets show an increasing understanding of the Law as a moral, not just a ceremonial, force.

6. Jesus brought a perfect understanding of the Mosaic Law, that of love and salvation.

7. By His death and resurrection, all who believe are saved and reconciled to God.

Many people who identify themselves as Christians, Muslims, or Jews regard the Bible as inspired by God yet written by a variety of imperfect men over thousands of years. Bible-believing Christians regard both the New and Old Testament as the undiluted Word of God, spoken by God and written down in its perfect form by humans. Belief in sacred texts is attested to in Jewish antiquity,[14][15] and this belief can also be seen in the earliest of Christian writings. Various texts of the Bible mention Divine agency in relation to prophetic writings,[16] the most explicit being 2 Tm 3:16: "All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." In their book A General Introduction to the Bible, Norman Geisler and William Nix wrote: "The process of inspiration is a mystery of the providence of God, but the result of this process is a verbal, plenary, inerrant, and authoritative record."[17] Some biblical scholars,[18][19][20] particularly Evangelicals, associate inspiration with only the original text; for example some American Protestants adhere to the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy which asserted that inspiration applied only to the autographic text of Scripture.[21]

The canonization of the Bible

Main article: Biblical Canon

The word "canon" etymologically means cane or reed. In early Christianity "canon" referred to a list of books approved for public reading. Books not on the list were referred to as "apocryphal" — meaning they were for private reading only. Under Latin usage from the fourth century on, canon came to stand for a closed and authoritative list in the sense of rule or norm.[22]

Canonization of the Hebrew Bible

The New Testament refers to the threefold division of the Hebrew Scriptures: the law, the prophets, and the writings. Luke 24:44 refers to the "law of Moses" (Pentateuch), the "prophets" which include certain historical books in addition to the books now called "prophets," and the psalms (the "writings" designated by its most prominent collection). The Hebrew Bible probably was canonized in these three stages: the law canonized before the Exile, the prophets by the time of the Syrian persecution of the Jews, and the writings shortly after AD 70 (the fall of Jerusalem). About that time, early Christian writings began being accepted by Christians as "scripture." These events, taken together, may have caused the Jews to close their "canon." They listed their own recognized Scriptures and also excluded both Christian and Jewish writings considered by them to be "apocryphal." In this canon the thirty-nine books found in the Old Testament of today's Christian Bibles were grouped together as twenty-two books, equaling the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. This canon of Jewish scripture is attested to by Philo, Josephus, the New Testament (Luke 11:51, Luke 24:44), and the Talmud.[22]

The New Testament writers assumed the inspiration of the Old Testament, probably earliest stated in 2 Timothy 3:16 which may be rendered "All Scripture is inspired of God" or "Every God-inspired Scripture is profitable for teaching." Both translations consider inspiration as a fact.[22]

Canonization of the Old Testament and New Testament

The Old Testament canon entered into Christian use in the Greek Septuagint translations and original books, and their differing lists of texts. In addition to the Septuagint, Christianity subsequently added various writings that would become the New Testament. Somewhat different lists of accepted works continued to develop in antiquity. In the fourth century a series of synods produced a list of texts equal to the 46-book canon of the Old testament and to the 27-book canon of the New Testament that would be subsequently used to today, most notably the Synod of Hippo in AD 393. Also c. 400, Jerome produced a definitive Latin edition of the Bible (see Vulgate), the canon of which, at the insistence of the Pope, was in accord with the earlier Synods. With the benefit of hindsight it can be said that this process effectively set the New Testament canon, although there are examples of other canonical lists in use after this time. A definitive list did not come from an Ecumenical Council until the Council of Trent (1545–63). [citation needed]

During the Protestant Reformation, certain reformers proposed different canonical lists than what was currently in use. Though not without debate, the list of New Testament books would come to remain the same; however, the Old Testament texts present in the Septuagint, but not included in the Jewish canon, fell out of favour. In time they would come to be removed from most Protestant canons. Hence, in a Catholic context these texts are referred to as deuterocanonical books, whereas in a Protestant context they are referred to as Apocrypha, the label applied to all texts excluded from the biblical canon. It should also be noted, that Catholics and Protestants both describe certain other books, such as the Acts of Peter, as apocryphal.

Thus, the Protestant Old Testament of today has a 39-book canon—the number varies from that of the books in the Tanakh (though not in content) because of a different method of division—while the Roman Catholic Church recognizes 46 books as part of the canonical Old Testament. The term "Hebrew Scriptures" is only synonymous with the Protestant Old Testament, not the Catholic, which contains the Hebrew Scriptures and additional texts. Both Catholics and Protestants have the same 27-book New Testament Canon.

Canonicity, which involves the discernment of which texts are divinely inspired, is distinct from questions of human authorship and the formation of the books of the Bible.[citation needed]

Ethiopian Orthodox canon

The Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church is wider than for most other Christian groups. The Ethiopian "narrower" Old Testament Canon includes the books found in the Septuagint accepted by other Orthodox Christians, in addition to Enoch, Jubilees, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, 3 books of Meqabyan (Maccabees), and Psalm 151. However, the three books of Meqabyan are similar to Maccabees in title only, and quite different in content from those of the other Christian churches which include them. The order of the other books is somewhat different from other groups', as well. The Church also has a "broader canon" that includes more books.[23]

Bible versions and translations

Further information: Bible translations

A Bible handwritten in Latin, on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England. This Bible was transcribed in Belgium in 1407 for reading aloud in a monastery.

A Bible handwritten in Latin, on display in Malmesbury Abbey, Wiltshire, England. This Bible was transcribed in Belgium in 1407 for reading aloud in a monastery.

In scholarly writing, ancient translations are frequently referred to as "versions," with the term "translation" being reserved for medieval or modern translations.[citation needed] Bible versions are discussed below, while Bible translations can be found on a separate page.

The original texts of the Tanakh were in Hebrew, although some portions were in Aramaic. In addition to the authoritative Masoretic Text, Jews still refer to the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, and the Targum Onkelos, an Aramaic version of the Bible. There are several different ancient versions of the Tanakh in Hebrew, mostly differing by spelling, and the traditional Jewish version is based on the version known as Aleppo Codex. Even in this version by itself, there are words which are traditionally read differently than written (sometimes one word is written and another is read), because the oral tradition is considered more fundamental than the written one, and presumably mistakes had been made in copying the text over the generations.

The primary biblical text for early Christians was the Septuagint or (LXX). In addition they translated the Hebrew Bible into several other languages. Translations were made into Syriac, Coptic, Ge'ez and Latin, among other languages. The Latin translations were historically the most important for the Church in the West, while the Greek-speaking East continued to use the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament and had no need to translate the New Testament.

The earliest Latin translation was the Old Latin text, or Vetus Latina, which, from internal evidence, seems to have been made by several authors over a period of time. It was based on the Septuagint, and thus included books not in the Hebrew Bible.

Pope Damasus I assembled the first list of books of the Bible at the Council of Rome in 382 AD. He commissioned Saint Jerome to produce a reliable and consistent text by translating the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin. This translation became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible and was declared by the Church to be the only authentic and official Bible.

Bible translations for many languages have been made through the various influences of Catholicism, Orthodox, Protestant, etc especially since the Protestant Reformation. The Bible has seen a notably large number of English language translations.

The work of Bible translation continues, including by Christian organisations such as Wycliffe Bible Translators (wycliffe.net), New Tribes Missions (ntm.org) and the Bible Societies (biblesociety.org). Of the world's 6,900 languages, 2,400 have some or all of the Bible, 1,600 (spoken by more than a billion people) have translation underway, and some 2,500 (spoken by 270 million people) are judged as needing translation to begin.[24]

Important characteristics of early Bible texts

See also: Chapters and verses of the Bible

* The use of chapters and verses was not introduced until the Middle Ages and later. The system used in English was developed by Stephanus (Robert Estienne of Paris) (as noted below)

* Early manuscripts of the letters of Paul and other New Testament writings show no punctuation whatsoever. [1] The punctuation was added later by other editors, according to their own understanding of the text.

Differences in Bible translations

This Gutenberg Bible is displayed by the United States Library of Congress.

This Gutenberg Bible is displayed by the United States Library of Congress.

See also: Bible translations: Approaches.

As Hebrew and Greek, the original languages of the Bible, have idioms and concepts not easily translated, there is an on going critical tension about whether it is better to give a word for word translation or to give a translation that gives a parallel idiom in the target language. For instance, in the English language Catholic translation, the New American Bible, as well as the Protestant translations of the Christian Bible, translations like the King James Version, the New Revised Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible are seen as literal translations (or "word for word"), whereas translations like the New International Version and New Living Version attempt to give relevant parallel idioms. The Living Bible and The Message are two paraphrases of the Bible that try to convey the original meaning in contemporary language. The further away one gets from word to word translation, the text becomes easier to read while relying more on the theological, linguistic or cultural understanding of the translator, which one would not normally expect a lay reader to require.

Inclusive language

Traditionally, English masculine pronouns have been used interchangeably to refer to the male gender and to all people. For instance, "All men are mortal" is not intended to imply that males are mortal but females are immortal. English language readers and hearers have had to interpret masculine pronouns (and such words as "man" and "mankind") based on context. Further, both Hebrew and Greek, like some of the Latin-origin languages, use the male gender of nouns and pronouns to refer to groups that contain both sexes. This creates some difficulty in determining whether a noun or pronoun should be translated using terms that refer to men only, or generically to men and women inclusively. Context sometimes, but not always, helps determine whether to decode them in a gender-insensitive or gender-specific way.

Contemporary language has changed in many cases to reflect criticism of the use of the masculine gender, which has been characterized as discriminatory. Current style guides, such as APA, MLA, NCTE, and others, have published statements encouraging, and in some cases requiring, the use of inclusive language, which avoids language this approach regards as sexist or class-distinctive.

Until recently, virtually all English translations of the Bible have used masculine nouns and pronouns both specifically (to refer to males) and generically (when the reference is not necessarily gender-specific). Recent examples of translations which incorporate gender-inclusive language include the New Revised Standard Version, the Revised English Bible, and Today's New International Version.

Comparison of Traditional vs Gender-Inclusive Translations of Rom. 12:6-8 Original New International Version Today's New International Version

We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully. We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

The introduction of chapters and verses

Main article: Chapters and verses of the Bible

See Tanakh for the Jewish textual tradition.

The Hebrew Masoretic text contains verse endings as an important feature. According to the Talmudic tradition, the verse endings are of ancient origin. The Masoretic textual tradition also contains section endings called parashiyot, which are indicated by a space within a line (a "closed" section") or a new line beginning (an "open" section). The division of the text reflected in the parashiyot is usually thematic. The parashiyot are not numbered.

In early manuscripts (most importantly in Tiberian Masoretic manuscripts, such as the Aleppo codex) an "open" section may also be represented by a blank line, and a "closed" section by a new line that is slightly indented (the preceding line may also not be full). These latter conventions are no longer used in Torah scrolls and printed Hebrew Bibles. In this system the one rule differentiating "open" and "closed" sections is that "open" sections must always begin at the beginning of a new line, while "closed" sections never start at the beginning of a new line.

Another related feature of the Masoretic text is the division of the sedarim. This division is not thematic, but is almost entirely based upon the quantity of text.

The Byzantines also introduced a chapter division of sorts, called Kephalaia. It is not identical to the present chapters.

The current division of the Bible into chapters and the verse numbers within the chapters has no basis in any ancient textual tradition. Rather, they are medieval Christian inventions. They were later adopted by many Jews as well, as technical references within the Hebrew text. Such technical references became crucial to medieval rabbis in the historical context of forced debates with Christian clergy (who used the chapter and verse numbers), especially in late medieval Spain.[25] Chapter divisions were first used by Jews in a 1330 manuscript and for a printed edition in 1516. However, for the past generation, most Jewish editions of the complete Hebrew Bible have made a systematic effort to relegate chapter and verse numbers to the margins of the text.

The division of the Bible into chapters and verses has often elicited severe criticism from traditionalists and modern scholars alike. Critics charge that the text is often divided into chapters in an incoherent way, or at inappropriate rhetorical points, and that it encourages citing passages out of context, in effect turning the Bible into a kind of textual quarry for clerical citations. Nevertheless, the chapter divisions and verse numbers have become indispensable as technical references for Bible study.

Stephen Langton is reputed to have been the first to put the chapter divisions into a Vulgate edition of the Bible, in 1205. They were then inserted into Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in the 1400s. Robert Estienne (Robert Stephanus) was the first to number the verses within each chapter, his verse numbers entering printed editions in 1551 (New Testament) and 1571 (Hebrew Bible).[26][27]

Textual criticism

Main articles: Biblical criticism and Criticism of the Bible.

Textual criticism refers to the investigation of the Bible as a text, and addresses questions such as authorship, dates of composition, and authorial intention.

Early criticism

The traditional view of the Mosaic authorship of the Torah came under sporadic criticism from medieval scholars including Isaac ibn Yashush, Abraham ibn Ezra, Bonfils of Damascus and bishop Tostatus of Avila, who pointed to passages such as the description of the death of Moses in Deuteronomy as evidence that some portions, at least, could not have been written by Moses. In the 17th century Thomas Hobbes collected the current evidence and became the first scholar to conclude outright that Moses could not have written the bulk of the Torah. Shortly afterwards the philosopher Baruch Spinoza published a unified critical analysis, demonstrating that the problematic passages were not isolated cases that could be explained away one by one, but pervasive throughout the five books, concluding that it was "clearer than the sun at noon that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses…." Despite determined opposition from the Church, both Catholic and Protestant, the views of Hobbes and Spinoza gained increasing acceptance amongst scholars.

The documentary hypothesis

Scholars intrigued by the hypothesis that Moses had not written the Pentateuch considered other authors. Independent but nearly simultaneous proposals by H. B. Witter, Jean Astruc, and J. G. Eichhorn separated the Pentateuch into two original documentary components, both dating from after the time of Moses. Others hypothesized the presence of two additional sources. The four documents were given working titles: J (or Yahwist), E (Elohist), P (Priestly), and D (Deuteronomist), each was discernible by its own characteristic language, and each, when read in isolation, presented a unified, coherent narrative.

Subsequent scholars, notably Eduard Reuss, Karl Heinrich Graf and Wilhelm Vatke, turned their attention to the order in which the documents had been composed (which they deduced from internal clues) and placed them in the context of a theory of the development of ancient Israelite religion, suggesting that much of the Laws and the narrative of the Pentateuch were unknown to the Israelites in the time of Moses. These were synthesized by Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), who suggested a historical framework for the composition of the documents and their redaction (combination) into the final document known as the Pentateuch. This hypothesis was challenged by William Henry Green in his The Mosaic Origins of the Pentateuchal Codes (available online). Nonetheless, according to contemporary Torah scholar Richard Elliott Friedman, Wellhausen's model of the documentary hypothesis continues to dominate the field of biblical scholarship: "To this day, if you want to disagree, you disagree with Wellhausen. If you want to pose a new model, you compare its merits with those of Wellhausen's model."[28]

The documentary hypothesis is important in the field of biblical studies not only because it claims that the Torah was written by different people at different times—generally long after the events it describes—[29] but it also proposed what was at the time a radically new way of reading the Bible. Many proponents of the documentary hypothesis view the Bible more as a body of literature than a work of history, believing that the historical value of the text lies not in its account of the events that it describes, but in what critics can infer about the times in which the authors lived (as critics may read Hamlet to learn about seventeenth-century England, but will not read it to learn about seventh-century Denmark).

Modern developments

The critical analysis of authorship now encompasses every book of the Bible. Every book in turn has been hypothesized to bear traces of multiple authorship[citation needed], even the book of Obadiah[citation needed], which is only a single page. In some cases the traditional view on authorship has been overturned; in others, additional support, at least in part has been found.

The development of the hypothesis has not stopped with Wellhausen. Wellhausen's hypothesis, for example, proposed that the four documents were composed in the order J-E-D-P, with P, containing the bulk of the Jewish law, dating from the post-Exilic Second Temple period (i.e., after 515 BC);[30] but the contemporary view is that P is earlier than D, and that all four books date from the First Temple period (i.e., prior to 587 BC).[31] The documentary hypothesis has more recently been refined by later scholars such as Martin Noth (who in 1943 provided evidence that Deuteronomy plus the following six books make a unified history from the hand of a single editor), Harold Bloom, Frank Moore Cross and Richard Elliot Friedman.

The documentary hypothesis, at least in the four-document version advanced by Wellhausen, has been controversial since its formulation. The direction of this criticism is to question the existence of separate, identifiable documents, positing instead that the biblical text is made up of almost innumerable strands so interwoven as to be hardly untangleable—the J document, in particular, has been subjected to such intense dissection that it seems in danger of disappearing.

Although biblical archeology has confirmed the existence of many people, places, and events mentioned in the Bible, many critical scholars have argued that the Bible be read not as an accurate historical document, but rather as a work of literature and theology that often draws on historical events—as well as upon non-Hebrew mythology—as primary source material. For these scholars, the Bible reveals much about the lives and times of its authors and compilers. The relevance of these ideas to contemporary religious life is left to clerics and adherents of contemporary religions to decide.

Theological responses

Judaism

The claim that the Torah—"the Five Books of Moses"—were not written by Moses, but by many authors long after Moses was said to have lived, directly challenged Jewish orthodoxy. For most, this claim implies that the Torah itself—especially its account of God's revelation at Mt. Sinai—is not historically reliable. Although many Orthodox scholars have rejected this "Higher Criticism", most Conservative and virtually all Reform Jewish scholars have accepted it. Consequently, there has been considerable debate among Jewish scholars as to the nature of revelation and the divine nature of the Torah. Conservative Jewish philosopher Elliot Dorff has categorized five distinct major Jewish positions in these debates within Conservative Judaism in the 20th century[32]:

* Orthodox (characterized by Eliezer Berkovitz and Norman Lamm): "Verbal Revelation: The Torah, including both the Written and Oral Traditions, consists of the exact words of God. He gave it all as one piece at Sinai."*

* Conservative I (characterized by Isaac Lesser, Alexander Kohut, Abraham Joshua Heschel, and David Novak): "Continuous Revelation:God dictated His will at Sinai and other times. It was written down by human beings, however, and hence the diverse traditions in the Bible."

* Conservative II (characterized by Ben Zion Bokser, Robert Gordis, Max Routtenberg and Emil Fackenheim): "Continuous Revelation: Human beings wrote the Torah, but they were divinely inspired."

* Conservative III (characterized by Louis Jacobs, Seymour Seigel, Jacob Agus, David Lieber and Elliot Dorff): "Continuous Revelation: The Torah is the human record of the concounter between God and the People Israel at Sinai. Since it was written by human beings, it contains some laws and ideas which we find repugnant today."

* Conservative IV/Reconstructionist (characterized by Mordecai Kaplan, Ira Eisenstein and Harold Schulweis): "No Revelation: Human beings wrote the Torah. No claim for divinity of the product."

In addition to the 5 categories described by Elliott, other positions have been adopted:

* Traditional Rabbi David Weiss HaLivni, the founder of the Union for Traditional Judaism, adapted a position he describes as chatu yisrael ("Israel sinned"), that God revealed the Torah to Moses on Mount Sinai but it subsequently became corrupted and lost, and Ezra restored it by redacting it from multiple manuscripts reflecting disparate traditions. Under this view, the Torah is the best available record of the Divine will, has prophetic commendation, and is binding on the Jewish people, but is not necessarily entirely free of disparaties. [33]

* Reform (characterized by the Movement's 1937 Guiding Principles): "Progressive revelation: The Torah is God's will written by human beings. As time goes on, we get to understand his will better and better (="progressive revelation").

* Reconstructionist Reconstructionist Judaism generally adapts the textual critical approach in toto and regards the Torah as either inspired rather than revealed, or an entirely human product rather than the product of an external God.

Christianity

In 1943 pope Pius XII's encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu gave the Vatican's imprimatur to textual criticism.

Archaeological and historical research

Main article: Biblical Archaeology

According to recent theories, linguistic as well as archaeological, the global structure of the texts in the Hebrew Bible were compiled during the reign of King Josiah in the 7th Century BC. Even though the components are derived from more ancient writings, the final form of the books is believed to have been set somewhere between the 1st Century BC and the 4th Century AD.

With regard to the Exodus and the 40-year sojourn in the desert, archaeological digs in possible Biblical locations have been unsuccessful so far. There is also no archaeological evidence of a conquest of the land and cities of Canaan of the kind recounted in the Book of Joshua.

However, after the split of the Kingdom of Israel in the second half of the 9th Century BC, archaeological findings fit the Biblical chronology.

Nomadist theory

The ancestors of the Hebrews and the Jews are believed to be either nomads who have become sedentary, or people from the plains of Canaan, who fled to the highlands to escape the control of the cities. These positions are held by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman in The Bible Unearthed, by the American archaeologist William Dever in Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come from?, and by Jean-Marie Husser, professor at Marc Bloch University in Strasbourg, France.

See also

Bible Portal

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

Bible

Look up Bible in

Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

Bible

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

The Bible and Works about the Bible

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

1911 Britannica entry

Biblical analysis

* Bible chronology

* Bible citation

* Bible prophecy

* Bible translations

* Biblical canon

* Bibliomancy is the use of random readings from a book for divination. In Jewish and Christian cultures, the Bible is often used.

* Books of the Bible

* Lost books of the Bible

* New Testament view on Jesus' life

* Parsha

* Ritual Decalogue

* Study Bible

* Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture

* Ten Commandments

Perspectives on the Bible

* Calvin's view of Scripture

* Jewish Biblical exegesis

* Islamic view of the Bible

* Biblical narratives and the Qur'an

History and the Bible

* The Bible and history

* History of the English Bible

* English Translations of the Bible

Biblical scholarship and analysis

* Bible Translations

* Biblical archaeology

* Dating the Bible

* Bible conspiracy theory

* Biblical literalism

* Biblical inerrancy

* Internal consistency and the Bible

* Bible scientific foreknowledge

* Criticism of the Bible

* Animals in the Bible

* Alcohol in the Bible

* Bibliolatry

* Old Testament: Timeline

Bible societies

* See Bible society for a list.

Commentaries

See Biblical exegesis

Notes and references

1. ^ Dictionary.com

2. ^ See Patrick H. Alexander The SBL Handbook of Style. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers. ISBN 1-56563-487-X.

3. ^ http://www.pcusa.org/101/101-bible.htm

4. ^ Bible Society stats.

5. ^ Online Etymology Dictionary entry for word "Bible"

6. ^ "From Hebrew Bible to Christian Bible" by Mark Hamilton on PBS's site From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians

7. ^ Dictionary.com etymology of the word "Bible"

8. ^ Bible Study, Bible Facts (HTML). Retrieved on 2007-11-05.

9. ^ Karen Jobes and Moises Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint ISBN 1-84227-061-3, (Paternoster Press, 2001). - The current standard for Introductory works on the Septuagint.

10. ^ Jennifer M. Dines, The Septuagint, Michael A. Knibb, Ed., London: T&T Clark, 2004

11. ^ a b Menachem Cohen, The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism in HaMikrah V'anachnu, ed. Uriel Simon, HaMachon L'Yahadut U'Machshava Bat-Z'mananu and Dvir, Tel-Aviv, 1979

12. ^ Metzger, Bruce R. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography (Oxford University Press, 1981) cf. Papyrus 52

13. ^ A Summary of the Bible by Lewis, CS: Believer's Web.

14. ^ Philo of Alexandria, De vita Moysis 3.23.

15. ^ Josephus, Contra Apion 1.8.

16. ^ "Basis for belief of Inspiration". Biblegateway.

17. ^ Norman L. Geisler, William E. Nix (1986). A General Introduction to the Bible. Moody Publishers, 86. ISBN 0-8024-2916-5.

18. ^ for example, seeLeroy Zuck, Roy B. Zuck (1991). Basic Bible Interpretation. Chariot Victor Pub, 68. ISBN 0-89693-819-0.

19. ^ Roy B. Zuck, Donald Campbell (2002). Basic Bible Interpretation. Victor. ISBN 0-7814-3877-2.

20. ^ Norman L. Geisler (1979, 1980). Inerrancy. The Zondervan Corporation, 294. ISBN 0-310-39281-0.

21. ^ International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (1978). "The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" (pdf). International Council on Biblical Inerrancy.

22. ^ a b c Stagg, Frank. New Testament Theology. Nashville: Broadman, 1962. ISBN 0805416137

23. ^ Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament (HTML). Retrieved on 2007-11-05.

24. ^ www.vision2025.org

25. ^ see Spanish Inquisition

26. ^ Chapters and Verses.

27. ^ The Examiner.

28. ^ Richard Elliott Friedman, "Who Wrote the Bible?," HarperSanFrancisco, 1997 (2nd edition).

29. ^ Joel Rosenberg, 1984 "The Bible: Biblical Narrative" in Barry Holtz, ed Back to the Sources New York: Summit Books p. 36; Nahum Sarna, 1986 Understanding Genesis New York:Schocken Books p. xxi-xxiii

30. ^ Wellhausen adopted the idea of a post-Exilic date for P from Eduard Reuss.

31. ^ Although the bulk of all four documents date from before 587 BCE, the strand of D known as Dtr2 dates from the following Exilic period.

32. ^ Elliot Dorff 1978 Conservative Judaism: Our Ancestors to Our Descendents New York: United Synagogue Youth pp. 114-115

33. ^ Rabbi David Weiss HaLivni, Revelation Restored: Divine Writ and Critical Responses. Westview Press, 2001. ISBN 978-0813333472

* Anderson, Bernhard W. Understanding the Old Testament. ISBN 0-13-948399-3.

* Berlin, Adele, Marc Zvi Brettler and Michael Fishbane. The Jewish Study Bible. Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-529751-2.

* Asimov, Isaac. Asimov's Guide to the Bible. New York, NY: Avenel Books, 1981. ISBN 0-517-34582-X.

* Dever, William G. Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did they Come from? Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003. ISBN 0-8028-0975-8.

* Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why New York, NY: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005. ISBN 0-06-073817-0.

* Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil A. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001. ISBN 0-684-86913-6.

* Geisler, Norman (editor). Inerrancy. Sponsored by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. Zondervan Publishing House, 1980, ISBN 0-310-39281-0.

* Head, Tom. The Absolute Beginner's Guide to the Bible. Indianapolis, IN: Que Publishing, 2005. ISBN 0-7897-3419-2.

* Hoffman, Joel M. In the Beginning. New York University Press, 2004. ISBN 0-8147-3690-4.

* Lindsell, Harold. The Battle for the Bible. Zondervan Publishing House, 1978. ISBN 0-310-27681-0.

* Lienhard, Joseph T. The Bible, The Church, and Authority. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995.

* Miller, John W. The Origins of the Bible: Rethinking Canon History Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1994. ISBN 0-8091-3522-1.

* Riches, John. The Bible: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2000. ISBN 0-19-285343-0

* Taylor, Hawley O. "Mathematics and Prophecy." Modern Science and Christian Faith. Wheaton: Van Kampen, 1948, pp. 175–83.

* Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, s.vv. "Book of Ezekiel," p. 580 and "prophecy," p. 1410. Chicago: Moody Bible Press, 1986.

:(

 

[Genedoc]

Filibuster is good shtick, BTW

No, it's not.

 

[quickhands]

As a pastor, I would never have the arrogance to tell someone how they should vote. That's an individual decision. But to tie their salvation to their vote is especially troubling to me.

this is something you have gone over countless times. You believe "once saved always saved". Catholics do not. It is not a council of bishops that ties anything to anything. It is Catholic Belief. You have a problem with what Catholics say to each other. As a Pastor shouldn't you tend to your flock and quit sticking your nose in the Catholic Business.You are worse than the Lady who gossips about the neighbors that she doesn't like who live down the street.

 

[matuski]

Filibuster is good shtick, BTW

No, it's not.

 

[[icon]]

Filibuster is good shtick, BTW

No, it's not.

Yes, It is.

 

[guru_007]

I'm Roman Catholic.

I don't mind being told whom to vote for if it assures eternal salvation. Going to be spending a lot more time in the afterlife than I am here on Earth.

HTH

 

[[icon]]

I'm Roman Catholic.I don't mind being told whom to vote for if it assures eternal salvation. Going to be spending a lot more time in the afterlife than I am here on Earth.HTH

100% chance Crosseyed swallows this hook

 

[roadkill1292]

Filibuster is good shtick, BTW

No, it's not.

Some of us are a little pressed for time during the workday. Not funny at all.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Filibuster is good shtick, BTW

No, it's not.

Some of us are a little pressed for time during the workday. Not funny at all.

Getting Things DoneFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Learn more about using Wikipedia for research •

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about the book by David Allen. For other uses, see Getting Things Done (disambiguation).

Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity Author David Allen

Subject(s) Business

Publisher Penguin

Publication date 2002

Pages 267 pp

ISBN ISBN 978-0142000281

Reprint Edition

Followed by Ready For Anything

Getting Things Done™ (commonly abbreviated as GTD) is an action management method of The David Allen Company, and the title of the book which describes the method by David Allen.[1]

GTD rests on the principle that a person needs to move tasks out of the mind by recording them somewhere. That way, the mind is freed from the job of remembering everything that needs to be done, and can concentrate on actually performing those tasks. What distinguishes GTD from other time- or action-management systems is the idea of grouping tasks by the context (defined as a place or set of available resources) in which they are to be performed.

Contents

[hide]

* 1 How Does GTD Work?

* 2 Principles

o 2.1 Collect

o 2.2 Process

o 2.3 Organize

o 2.4 Review

o 2.5 Do

* 3 Tools and techniques

* 4 Reception

* 5 See also

* 6 References

* 7 Further reading

* 8 External links

o 8.1 Excerpts from Getting Things Done (Business Week):

[edit] How Does GTD Work?

GTD is strictly defined by David Allen on his website [1]. Unlike other time management experts, Allen does not begin by emphasizing setting priorities. Instead, he promotes two key elements in time management -- control and perspective. Allen advocates three major models for gaining control and perspective:

1. A workflow process

2. A framework with 6 levels of focus

3. A natural planning method

The first major model is the workflow process, which is used to gain control over all the tasks and commitments which one needs or wants to get done.[2]:20 The workflow process consists of five distinct phases:

1. Collect

2. Process

3. Organize

4. Review

5. Do

While one is processing tasks, Allen suggests that any new task which can be completed in less than two minutes should be done immediately.

Allen uses an airplane analogy to illustrate his second major model, 6 different levels of focus, and give perspective on tasks and commitments. These 6 levels of focus, from the bottom up, are [2]:51 :

1. Current actions

2. Current projects

3. Areas of responsibility

4. Yearly goals

5. 5 year vision

6. Life goals

The bottom level -- your current to do list -- is at "runway" height, and the top level -- Life Goals -- is at 50,000 feet, with the other 4 areas of focus at various heights between the two. Considering projects, actions, open loops, and other "input" from a variety of "heights" gives one varying perspective.

Allen strongly advocates doing a weekly review process which utilizes the different levels of focus. The perspective gained from utilizing these different levels of focus should drive one's priorities, which in turn determines the priority of when and if one is to do the particular individual tasks and commitments gathered during the workflow process. During this weekly review, the user also determines the context for the tasks and places them on the appropriate lists. Examples of grouping together similar tasks include making a list of telephone calls to make or errands to do while downtown. Context lists can be defined by the set of tools available or by the presence of indviduals or groups for whom one has items to discuss or present.

Allen expects that the first two models are sufficient most of the time to gain control and perspective on the majority of tasks and projects. However, there are some cases in which more involved planning and thinking are necessary.[2]:54 This leads to the third major model, which is the natural planning method. While the workflow model has a "horizontal" focus on doing individual tasks, the natural planning method has a "vertical" focus on planning projects and thinking through topics. The planning model consists of 5 stages which are:

1. Defining the purpose

2. Envisioning the outcome

3. Brainstorming

4. Organizing

5. Identifying next actions

The psychology of GTD is based on making it easy to store, track and retrieve all the information related to the things you need to get done. Allen suggests that many of the mental blocks we encounter in regard to doing certain activities are caused by insufficient 'front-end' planning (i.e., for any project we need to clarify what is to be achieved and what specific actions are needed to achieve it). It is most practical, according to Allen, to do this thinking in advance, generating a series of actions which we can later undertake without any further planning.

Allen also contends that our mental "reminder system" is rather inefficient and seldom reminds us of what we need to do at the time and place that we can do it. Consequently, the "next actions" stored by context in the "trusted system" act as an external support which ensures that we are presented with the right reminders at the right time. There are many associated personal management tips and tricks detailed in Getting Things Done which can be useful for implementing the workflow described by Allen.

A capsule description of GTD from Allen's book Ready for Anything:

“Get everything out of your head. Make decisions about actions required on stuff when it shows up — not when it blows up. Organize reminders of your projects and the next actions on them in appropriate categories. Keep your system current, complete, and reviewed sufficiently to trust your intuitive choices about what you're doing (and not doing) at any time.”

[edit] Principles

The core principles of GTD are:

[edit] Collect

Capture everything that you need to track, remember, or act on in what Allen calls a bucket: a physical inbox, an email inbox, a tape recorder, a notebook, a PDA, or any combination of these. Get everything out of your head and into your collection device, ready for processing. All buckets should be emptied (processed) at least once per week.

Allen doesn't advocate any preferred collection method, leaving the choice to the individual. He only insists upon the importance of emptying the "buckets" regularly. Any storage space (physical inbox, email inbox, tape recorder, notebook, PDA, etc) that is inspected regularly by the individual is acceptable.

[edit] Process

When you process your inbox, follow a strict workflow:

* Start at the top.

* Deal with one item at a time.

* Never put anything back into 'in'.

* If an item requires action:

* Do it (if it takes less than two minutes), OR

* Delegate it, OR

* Defer it.

* If an item does not require action:

* File it for reference, OR

* Throw it away, OR

* Incubate it for possible action later.

If it would take less than 2 minutes to do something, just do it immediately. Two minutes is a guideline, roughly the time it would take to defer the action formally.

[edit] Organize

Allen describes a suggested set of lists which you can use to keep track of items awaiting attention:

* Next actions -- For every item requiring your attention, decide what is the next action that you can physically take on that item. For example, if the item is, "Write project report," the next action might be, "Email Fred for meeting minutes," or, "Call Mary to ask about report requirements." Though there may be many steps and actions required to complete the item, there will always be something that you need to do first, and this step should be recorded in the next actions list. Preferably, these steps are organized by the context in which they can be done, such as "in the office," "by the phone," or "at the store."

* Projects -- Every open loop in your life or work which requires more than one physical action to achieve becomes a project. These projects are tracked and periodically reviewed to make sure that every project has a next action associated with it, and thus can be moved forward.

* Waiting for -- When you have delegated an action to someone else, or are waiting for some external event before you can move a project forward, this is tracked in your system and periodically checked to see if action is due, or a reminder needs to be sent.

* Someday/Maybe -- Things that you want to do at some point, but not right now. Examples might be "learn Chinese," or, "take diving holiday."

A calendar is important for keeping track of your appointments and commitments; however, Allen specifically recommends that the calendar be reserved for the hard landscape: things which absolutely have to be done by a particular deadline, or meetings and appointments which are fixed in time and place. To-do items should be reserved for the next action lists.

A final key organizing component of GTD is the filing system. A filing system must be easy, simple and fun. Even a single piece of paper, if you need it for reference, should get its own file if it doesn't belong in a folder you already have. Allen's suggestion is that you keep a single, alphabetically organized filing system, in order to make it as quick and easy as possible to store and retrieve the information you need.

Users of Google's Gmail online email service can also use labels to create 'To-Do' lists and projects, as explained in Bryan Murdaugh's "Getting Things Done with Gmail" whitepaper. Gmail uses many of the same concepts of GTD, but implements them into online email. For Gmail users who use the Firefox web browser, the "GTDInbox Add-on" may be useful, as it brings the GTD interface into Gmail in a clean and easily usable way.

[edit] Review

The lists of actions and reminders will be of little use if you don't review them at least daily, or whenever you have time available. Given the time, energy and resources that you have at that particular moment, decide what is the most important thing for you to be doing right now, and do it. If you are inclined to procrastinate, you may end up always doing the easy tasks and avoiding the difficult ones. To solve this, you can decide to do the actions of the list one by one, following their order, just like you process your inbox.

At least weekly, the discipline of GTD requires that you review all your outstanding actions, projects and 'waiting for' items, making sure that any new tasks or forthcoming events are entered into your system, and that everything is up to date. Allen suggests the creation of a "tickler file" in order to help refresh your memory each week with your outstanding tasks and projects.

[edit] Do

Any organizational system is no good if you spend all your time organizing your tasks instead of actually doing them! David Allen's contention is that if you can make it simple, easy, and fun to take the actions that you need to take, you will be less inclined to procrastinate or become overwhelmed with too many 'open loops'.

[edit] Tools and techniques

A slice of '43 Folders'

A slice of '43 Folders'

One device that Allen suggests is the tickler file for organizing your paperwork (also known as the '43 folders'). Twelve folders are used to represent each month and an additional 31 folders are used to represent each day. The folders are arranged to help remind you of activities to be done that day. Each day you open to the numbered folder representing today's date. You take all the items out of the folder and put the empty folder into the next month. This sort of management allows you to file hardcopy reminders to yourself. For instance, if you had a concert on the 12th of the month, you would store the tickets in the 12th folder, and when the 12th came around, they would be there waiting for you.

[edit] Reception

In 2005 Wired Magazine called GTD "A new cult for the info age," describing the enthusiasm for this methodology among Information Technology and knowledge workers as a kind of cult following. Allen's ideas have also been popularized through the internet, especially via blogs.

Some followers of GTD advocate a 'back-to-basics' approach to personal management, and a rejection of over-engineered, high-tech solutions in favor of simple, inexpensive tools such as the Hipster PDA, NextActionCards, or even the Moleskine paper pad. However, David Allen himself is a happy user of a Palm PDA. In his FAQ he says he uses the software it came with and records "events of the day" on paper to be processed later.

In 2005, Ben Hammersley interviewed David Allen for The Guardian, with an article called Meet the man who can bring order to your universe, saying "For me, as with the hundreds of thousands around the world who press the book into their friends' hands with fire in their eyes, Allen's ideas are nothing short of life-changing."

In 2007 Time Magazine called Getting Things Done the self-help business book of its time, a contrast to the notion that GTD has only a niche following of zealous enthusiasts.

In 2007 Wired ran a long article about GTD and Allen, quoting him as saying "the workings of an automatic transmission are more complicated than a manual transmission, [t]o simplify a complex event, you need a complex system." The author, Gary Wolf dug into the roots of GTD, covering Allen's stay in a mental hospital and his encounter with several New Age gurus, including Sri John-Roger who created the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness, a church of which Allen is still a minister.

[edit] See also

* Comparison of GTD software

[edit] References

1. ^ Getting Things Done and GTD are registered trademarks of the David Allen Company.

2. ^ a b c Allen, David (2001). Getting things done : the art of stress-free productivity. New York: Viking. ISBN 9780670889068.

[edit] Further reading

* Allen, David (2003). Ready for Anything. Viking Books. ISBN 0-670-03250-6.

[edit] External links

* David Allen & Co. official site

* Earth2Adam.com (Entourage GTD Series) Articles on implementing GTD with Entourage 2004

* GTD on Lifehack.org GTD tag on the community blog on GTD and Productivity

* Lifehacker.com This blog offers lots of articles on GTD tools and techniques

* GTD resources Extensive list of GTD related resources

* WhitepapersThe official GTD whitepapers for Outlook 2003, Entourage and Lotus Notes written by the David Allen Company

* GTD for Lotus Notes

* 43 Folders, a Mac-oriented blog devoted to GTD-related tips and tricks

* The Getting Things Done tips and techniques

* GTD: A New Cult for the Info Age (Wired magazine) July 2005 article

* Implementing GTD with your BlackBerry, blog article on implementing GTD with your BlackBerry.

* #GTD IRC channel IRC channel #GTD at irc.freenode.net

* A Survey of the GTD App Landscape

* The Master of Getting Things Done (Business 2.0 magazine) June 2007 article

* Getting Things Done Guru David Allen and His Cult of Hyperefficiency (Wired magazine) September 2007 article

* Did I Get Things Done? One mans trials with the GTD System

* Simply Get Things Done Online Course From 0 to productivity in 10 easy steps - a short 10-step course with tips and tricks teaching how you can simply adopt the GTD techniques

[edit] Excerpts from Getting Things Done (Business Week):

* BW Online | GTD - Chapter 1: “The Art of Getting Things Done”

* BW Online | GTD - Chapter 6: “Processing: Getting ”In“ to Empty”

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done"

Categories: Management | Self-help books | Personal development

 

[[icon]]

:lmFao: keys

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I like that the shtick now has a name (filibuster).

 

[redman]

Stop with the filibuster.

First of all, to claim that this is the first time this has happened is idiotic. Jerry Falwell made a career out of it. Where do you think the "religious right" came from?

Second, I've often wondered how much more comfortable Catholics are voting for Democrats who tend to favor a large, centralized federal government given the fact that their church is structured the same way, as opposed to Protestants who tend to have more locally controlled religious institutions.

 

[whoknew]

Cross, I reckon most Catholics don't really worry too much about the bishops telling them not to vote for pro-choice people. In the same token, many Catholics are pro-life and would vote that way anyway.

 

[[icon]]

oh and

 

[tomarken]

Stop with the filibuster.

First of all, to claim that this is the first time this has happened is idiotic. Jerry Falwell made a career out of it. Where do you think the "religious right" came from?

Second, I've often wondered how much more comfortable Catholics are voting for Democrats who tend to favor a large, centralized federal government given the fact that their church is structured the same way, as opposed to Protestants who tend to have more locally controlled religious institutions.

'WTF is a filibuster?

Never mind, found it:

Filibuster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Have questions? Find out how to ask questions and get answers. •Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses see Filibuster (disambiguation).

As a form of obstructionism in a legislature or other decision making body, a filibuster is an attempt to extend debate upon a proposal in order to delay or completely prevent a vote on its passage. The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless a supermajority of three-fifths of the Senate (60 Senators, if all 100 seats are filled) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture.[1] In the United Kingdom Parliament, a bill defeated by this maneuver is said to have been "talked out".

The term 'filibuster' was first used in 1851. It was derived from the Spanish filibustero meaning 'pirate' or 'freebooter'. This term had in turn evolved from the French word flibustier, which itself evolved from the Dutch vrijbuiter (freebooter). This term was applied at the time to American adventurers, mostly from Southern states, who sought to overthrow the governments of Central American states, and was transferred to the users of the filibuster, seen as a tactic for pirating or hijacking debate.[2]

Contents [hide]

1 United States

1.1 Procedural filibuster

1.2 Preparations

1.3 History

1.3.1 Early use

1.3.2 The 20th century and the emergence of cloture

1.3.3 Current practice

1.3.4 The filibuster today

2 Canada

2.1 Bill 103 - The Megacity Bill

3 UK Parliament

3.1 Filibusters in other legislatures on the British model

4 France

5 Fictional representations of filibusters

6 See also

7 References

7.1 Notes

7.2 Media

[edit] United States

[edit] Procedural filibuster

In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters, in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster can therefore be as powerful as an actual filibuster. Previously the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently they need only indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture.

[edit] Preparations

Preparations for a filibuster can be very elaborate. Sometimes cots are brought into the hallways or cloakrooms for senators to sleep on. According to Newsweek, "They used to call it 'taking to the diaper,' a phrase that referred to the preparation undertaken by a prudent senator before an extended filibuster. Strom Thurmond visited a steam room before his filibuster in order to dehydrate himself so he could drink without urinating. An aide stood by in the cloakroom with a pail in case of emergency."[3]

Filibusters have become much more common in recent decades. Twice as many filibusters took place in the 1991-1992 legislative session as took place in the entire nineteenth century.[4]

[edit] History

[edit] Early use

In 1789, the first U.S. Senate adopted rules allowing the Senate "to move the previous question," ending debate and proceeding to a vote. In 1806, Aaron Burr argued that the motion regarding the previous question was redundant, had only been exercised once in the preceding four years,[5] and should be eliminated. The Senate agreed, and thus the potentiality for a filibuster sprang into being. Because the Senate created no alternative mechanism for terminating debate, the filibuster became an option for delay and blocking of floor votes.

The filibuster remained a solely theoretical option until 1841, when the Democratic minority tried to block a bank bill favored by the Whig majority by using this political tactic. Senator Henry Clay, a promoter of the bill, threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate and he was unsuccessful in eliminating the filibuster with a simple majority vote.

[edit] The 20th century and the emergence of cloture

In 1917 a rule allowing for the cloture of debate (ending a filibuster) was adopted by the Democratic Senate[6] at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson.[7] From 1917 to 1949, the requirement for cloture was two-thirds of those voting.

In 1946 Southern Democrats blocked a vote on a bill proposed by Democrat Dennis Chavez of New Mexico (S. 101) that would have created a permanent Fair Employment Practices Committee (FEPC) to prevent discrimination in the work place. The filibuster lasted weeks, and Senator Chavez was forced to remove the bill from consideration after a failed cloture vote even though he had enough votes to pass the bill. As civil rights loomed on the Senate agenda, this rule was revised in 1949 to allow cloture on any measure or motion by two-thirds of the entire Senate membership; in 1959 the threshold was restored to two-thirds of those voting. After a series of filibusters led by Southern Democrats in the 1960s over civil rights legislation, the Democrat-controlled Senate[6] in 1975 revised its cloture rule so that three-fifths of the Senators sworn (usually 60 senators) could limit debate. Changes to Senate rules still require two-thirds of Senators voting. Despite this rule, the filibuster or the threat of a filibuster remains an important tactic that allows a minority to affect legislation. Strom Thurmond (D/R-SC) set a record in 1957 by filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 for 24 hours and 18 minutes, although the bill ultimately passed. Thurmond broke the previous record of 22 hours and 26 minutes set by Wayne Morse (I-OR) in 1953 protesting the Tidelands Oil legislation.

The filibuster has tremendously increased in frequency of use since the 1960s. In the 1960s, no Senate term had more than seven filibusters. In the first decade of the 21st century, no Senate term had fewer than 49 filibusters. The 1999-2002 Senate terms both had 58 filibusters. [1]

[edit] Current practice

Filibusters do not occur in legislative bodies in which time for debate is strictly limited by procedural rules. The House did not adopt rules restricting debate until 1842, and the filibuster was used in that body before that time.

Budget bills are governed under special rules called "reconciliation" which do not allow filibusters. Reconciliation once only applied to bills that would reduce the budget deficit, but since 1996 it has been used for all matters related to budget issues.

A filibuster can be defeated by the governing party if they leave the debated issue on the agenda indefinitely, without adding anything else. Strom Thurmond's attempt to filibuster the Civil Rights Act was defeated when Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson refused to refer any further business to the Senate, which required the filibuster to be kept up indefinitely. Instead, the opponents were all given a chance to speak and the matter eventually was forced to a vote.

According to a Historical Moments Essay on the U.S. Senate website, the Republican Party was the first to initiate a filibuster against a judicial nominee in 1968, forcing Democratic president Lyndon Johnson to withdraw the nomination of Associate Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas to be chief justice.

[edit] The filibuster today

In 2005, a group of Republican senators led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), responding to the Democrats' threat to filibuster some judicial nominees of President George W. Bush to prevent a vote on the nominations, floated the idea of making a rules change to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominees with the justification that the current Senate rules allowing such filibusters are unconstitutional. Senator Trent Lott, the junior Republican senator from Mississippi, named the plan the "nuclear option." Republican leaders later referred to the plan as the "constitutional option," though opponents and some supporters of the plan continue to use "nuclear option."

On May 23, 14 senators — seven Democrats and seven Republicans — led by John McCain (R-AZ) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) brokered a deal to allow three of Bush's nominees a vote on the Senate floor while leaving two others subject to a filibuster. The seven Democrats promised not to filibuster Bush's nominees except under "extraordinary circumstances," while the seven Republicans promised to oppose the nuclear option unless they thought a nominee was being filibustered that wasn't under "extraordinary circumstances." Specifically, the Democrats promised to stop the filibuster on Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William H. Pryor, Jr., who had all been filibustered in the Senate before. In return, the Republicans would stop the effort to ban the filibuster for judicial nominees. "Extraordinary circumstances" was not defined in advance. The term was open for interpretation by each Senator, but the Republicans and Democrats would have had to agree on what it meant if any nominee were to be blocked. Senator John Kerry led a failed filibuster against Judge (now Justice) Alito in January 2006, calling Alito's nomination an "extraordinary circumstance."

This agreement expired at the end of the second session of the 109th United States Congress (ended January 3, 2007).

Senate Democratic leadership allowed a filibuster on July 17, 2007 on debate about a variety of amendments to the 2008 defense authorization bill H.R. 1585, the Defense Authorization bill, specifically the Levin-Reed amendment S.AMDT.2087 to H.R.1585. The filibuster had been threatened by Republican leadership to prompt a cloture vote.

[edit] Canada

[edit] Bill 103 - The Megacity Bill

A unique form of filibuster was pioneered by the Ontario New Democratic Party in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in April 1997. To protest Progressive Conservative government legislation that would amalgamate the city of Toronto, Ontario, the small New Democratic caucus introduced 11,500 amendments to the megacity bill, created on computers with mail merge functionality. Each amendment would name a street in the proposed city, and provide that public hearings be held into the megacity with residents of the street invited to participate. The Ontario Liberal Party also joined the filibuster with a smaller series of amendments; a typical Liberal amendment would give a historical designation to a named street. The NDP then added another series of over 700 amendments, each proposing a different date for the bill to come into force.

The filibuster began on April 2 with the Abbeywood Trail amendment and occupied the legislature day and night, the members alternating in shifts. On April 4, exhausted and often sleepy government members inadvertently let one of the NDP amendments pass, and the handful of residents of Cafon Court in Etobicoke were granted the right to a public consultation on the bill (the government subsequently nullified this with an amendment of their own). On April 6, with the alphabetical list of streets barely into the E's, Speaker Chris Stockwell ruled that there was no need for the 230 words identical in each amendment to be read aloud each time, only the street name. With a vote still needed on each amendment, Zorra Street was not reached until April 8. The NDP amendments were then voted down one by one, eventually using a similar abbreviated process, and the filibuster finally ended on April 11.

External link: archive of the amendment debates in the Provincial Hansard. The filibuster extends from section L176B of the archive to L176AE; the Cafon Court slip-up is in section L176H, Stockwell rules on the issue of repetition in L176N, and Zorra Street is reached in L176S.

See Common Sense Revolution for more information.

[edit] UK Parliament

Procedural rules in the British House of Commons do not allow Members to speak on just any subject; they must stick to the topic of the debate.

In 1874, Joseph Gillis Biggar started making long speeches in the House of Commons, lower house of the Parliament of the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to delay the passage of Irish coercion acts. Charles Stewart Parnell, a young nationalist MP, who in 1880 became leader of the Irish Parliamentary Party, joined him in this tactic to obstruct the business of the House and force the Liberals and Conservatives to negotiate with him and his party. The tactic was enormously successful, and Parnell and his MPs succeeded in, for a time, forcing Parliament to take the "Irish question" of return to self-government seriously.

In 1983, Member of Parliament (MP) John Golding talked for over 11 hours during an all-night sitting at the committee stage of the British Telecommunications Bill. However, as this was at a standing committee and not in the Commons chamber, he was also able to take breaks to eat. The all-time Commons record for non-stop speaking, six hours, was set by Henry Brougham in 1828, though this was not a filibuster.

The 20th-Century record for the longest non-stop Commons speech is held by Conservative barrister Sir Ivan Lawrence. The then MP for Burton spoke for four hours 23 minutes during the Fluoridation Bill's committee stage on March 6, 1985.

The 21st-Century record was set on December 2, 2005 by Andrew Dismore, Labour MP for Hendon. Dismore spoke for three hours 17 minutes to block a Conservative Private Member's Bill, the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill, which he claimed amounted to "vigilante law".[8] Although Dismore is credited with speaking for 197 minutes, he regularly accepted interventions from other MPs who wished to comment on points made in his speech. Taking multiple interventions artificially inflates the duration of a speech, and is seen by many as a tactic to prolong a speech.

Filibustering can have consequences that were not expected or intended. In January 2000, filibustering orchestrated by Conservative Members of Parliament to oppose the Disqualifications Bill led to cancellation of the day's parliamentary business on Prime Minister Tony Blair's 1000th day in office. However, since this business included Prime Minister's Question Time, Conservative Leader William Hague was deprived of the opportunity of a high-profile confrontation with the Prime Minister.

On Friday, 20th April 2007, a Private Member's Bill aimed at exempting Members of Parliament from the Freedom of Information Act was 'talked out' by a collection of MPs, led by Liberal Democrats Simon Hughes and Norman Baker who debated for 5 hours, therefore running out of time for the parliamentary day and 'sending the bill to the bottom of the stack'. However, since there were no other Private Member's Bills to debate, it was resurrected the following Monday.[9]

[edit] Filibusters in other legislatures on the British model

The Northern Ireland House of Commons saw a notable filibuster in 1936 when Tommy Henderson (Independent Unionist MP for Shankill) spoke for nine and a half hours (ending just before 4 AM) on the Appropriation Bill. As this Bill applied government spending to all departments, almost any topic was relevant to the debate, and Henderson used the opportunity to list all his many criticisms of the Unionist government.

In the Southern Rhodesia House of Assembly, the Independent member Dr Ahrn Palley staged a similar all-night filibuster against the Law and Order Maintenance Bill in 1960.

[edit] France

In France, in August 2006, the left-wing opposition submitted 137,449 amendments to the proposed law bringing the share in Gaz de France owned by the French state from 80% to 34%, to allow for the merger between Gaz de France and Suez. Normal parliamentary procedure would require 10 years to vote on all the amendments.

The French constitution gives the government two options to defeat such a filibuster. The first one is through the use of the article 49 paragraph 3 procedure, according to which the law is adopted except if a majority is reached on a non-confidence motion. The second one is the article 44 paragraph 3 through which the government can force a global vote on all amendments it did not approve or submit itself.

In the end, the government did not have to use either of those procedures. As the parliamentary debate started, the left-wing opposition chose to withdraw all the amendments to allow for the vote to proceed. The "filibuster" was aborted because the opposition to the privatisation of Gaz de France appeared to lack support amongst the general population. It also appeared that this privatisation law could be used by the left-wing in the upcoming presidential election of 2007 as a political argument. Indeed, Nicolas Sarkozy, president of the Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (UMP - the right wing ruling party), Interior Minister, former Finance Minister and candidate to the presidency, had previously promised that the share owned by the French government in Gaz de France would never go below 70%.

[edit] Fictional representations of filibusters

The 1939 film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington climaxes with a young Junior Senator Jefferson Smith (played by Jimmy Stewart), astonished to discover the corruption of his mentor, staging a filibuster to prevent his expulsion from the chamber long enough to expose the corruption.

In the King of the Hill episode Flush with Power, a drought brings forth ordinance 631-A, a law which makes "lo-flo" toilets mandatory (which in reality waste more water than high-capacity toilets). Hank joins the Heimlich County Board of Zoning and Resources in an attempt to repeal the ordinance, but his actions earn the chagrin of Nate Hashaway, fellow board member and owner of Hashaway Fixtures (the manufacturer of the toilets). At the time of the vote on his repeal of the ordinance, everyone but Hank votes nay. About to give up, Hank takes the advice of Peggy. He begins reciting musings written by Peggy, which is immediately apparent to Nate Hashaway as a filibuster, forcing other board members to use the lo-flo toilets and see first-hand how useless they are.

The Stackhouse Filibuster, the 39th episode of The West Wing.

[edit] See also

Look up Filibuster in

Wiktionary, the free dictionary.Constitution of the Roman Republic

Obstructionism

Nuclear option

[edit] References

[edit] Notes

^ United States Senate- "Filibusters and Cloture", retrieved October 11, 2007

^ Online Etymology Dictionary - "filibuster", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ Newsweek - "Filibuster: Not Like It Used to Be", retrieved February 14, 2006

^ Lazare, D. Frozen Republic, p.198

^ see M. Gold & D. Gupta, 28 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 205 at 215

^ a b United States Senate - "Party Division in the Senate, 1789-Present", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ United States Senate - "Filibuster and Cloture", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ BBC News - "MP's marathon speech sinks bill", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ BBC News

[edit] Media

BBC, "Filibustering," at BBC News, 16 July 2005.

BBC, "MP's marathon speech sinks bill" at BBC News, 2 Dec. 2005.

Sarah A. Binder and Sterven S. Smith, Politics or Principle: Filibustering in the United States Senate. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1996. ISBN 0-8157-0952-8

Eleanor Clift, "Filibuster: Not Like It Used to Be," Newsweek, 24 Nov. 2003.

Bill Dauster, "It’s Not Mr. Smith Goes to Washington: The Senate Filibuster Ain’t What it Used To Be," The Washington Monthly, Nov. 1996, at 34-36.

Alan S. Frumin, "Cloture Procedure," in Riddick's Senate Procedure, 282–334. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1992.

Garry Gamber, "Famous Filibusters in Our Political History"

Daniel Lazare, The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy. Harcourt, 1996. ISBN 0-15-100085-9

Jessica Reaves, "The Filibuster Formula," Time, 25 Feb. 2003.

U.S. Senate, "Filibuster and Cloture."

U.S. Senate, "Filibuster Derails Supreme Court Appointment."

[hide]v • d • eUnited States Congress

House of Representatives, Senate — 110th Congress

Members Current, Freshmen – House: Current by seniority, Former members | Senate: Current by age, Current by seniority; Former, Former still living, Expelled/censured, Longest serving, Classes

Leaders House: Speaker, Party leaders, Party whips, Dem. caucus, Rep. conference, Dean | Senate: President pro tempore (list), Party leaders, Assistant party leaders, Dem. Caucus (Chair, Secretary, Policy comm. chair), Rep. Conference (Chair, Vice-Chair, Policy comm. chair), Dean

Groups African Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, Caucuses, Committees, Demographics, Hispanic Americans, Senate Women, House Women

Agencies,

Employees &

Offices Architect of the Capitol, Capitol Guide Service (board), Capitol Police (board), Chiefs of Staff, GAO, Government Printing Office, Law Revision Counsel, Librarian of Congress, Poet laureate | House: Chaplain, Chief Administrative Officer, Clerk, Doorkeeper, Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Operations, Historian, Page (board), Parliamentarian, Postmaster, Reading clerk, Recording Studio, Sergeant at Arms | Senate: Chaplain, Curator, Historian, Librarian, Page, Parliamentarian, Secretary, Sergeant at Arms

Politics &

Procedure Act of Congress (list), Caucuses, Committees, Hearings, Joint session, Oversight, Party Divisions, Rider | House: Committees, History, Jefferson's Manual, Procedures | Senate: Committees, Filibuster, History, Traditions, VPs' tie-breaking votes

Buildings Botanic Garden, Capitol, Capitol Complex, Office buildings (House: Cannon, Ford, Longworth, O'Neill, Rayburn, Senate: Dirksen, Hart, Russell)

Research Biographical directory, Congressional Quarterly, Congressional Record, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, The Hill, Roll Call, THOMAS

Misc List of lists, Congressional districts (by area), Mace of the House, Power of enforcement, Scandals, Softball League

Websites: House of Representatives | Senate

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster"

Categories: Dutch loanwords | Parliamentary procedure | Politics of Canada | Terminology of the United States Senate

 

[Genedoc]

Stop with the filibuster.

First of all, to claim that this is the first time this has happened is idiotic. Jerry Falwell made a career out of it. Where do you think the "religious right" came from?

Second, I've often wondered how much more comfortable Catholics are voting for Democrats who tend to favor a large, centralized federal government given the fact that their church is structured the same way, as opposed to Protestants who tend to have more locally controlled religious institutions.

Please review the size of the federal government in 2000 compared to the size of the federal government today and revisit this position. TIA.

 

[redman]

Stop with the filibuster.

First of all, to claim that this is the first time this has happened is idiotic. Jerry Falwell made a career out of it. Where do you think the "religious right" came from?

Second, I've often wondered how much more comfortable Catholics are voting for Democrats who tend to favor a large, centralized federal government given the fact that their church is structured the same way, as opposed to Protestants who tend to have more locally controlled religious institutions.

Please review the size of the federal government in 2000 compared to the size of the federal government today and revisit this position. TIA.

You're preaching to the choir here. I don't dispute the Republicans have strayed from their historical doctrine.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Stop with the filibuster.

First of all, to claim that this is the first time this has happened is idiotic. Jerry Falwell made a career out of it. Where do you think the "religious right" came from?

Second, I've often wondered how much more comfortable Catholics are voting for Democrats who tend to favor a large, centralized federal government given the fact that their church is structured the same way, as opposed to Protestants who tend to have more locally controlled religious institutions.

'WTF is a filibuster?

Never mind, found it:

Filibuster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Have questions? Find out how to ask questions and get answers. •Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses see Filibuster (disambiguation).

As a form of obstructionism in a legislature or other decision making body, a filibuster is an attempt to extend debate upon a proposal in order to delay or completely prevent a vote on its passage. The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless a supermajority of three-fifths of the Senate (60 Senators, if all 100 seats are filled) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture.[1] In the United Kingdom Parliament, a bill defeated by this maneuver is said to have been "talked out".

The term 'filibuster' was first used in 1851. It was derived from the Spanish filibustero meaning 'pirate' or 'freebooter'. This term had in turn evolved from the French word flibustier, which itself evolved from the Dutch vrijbuiter (freebooter). This term was applied at the time to American adventurers, mostly from Southern states, who sought to overthrow the governments of Central American states, and was transferred to the users of the filibuster, seen as a tactic for pirating or hijacking debate.[2]

Contents [hide]

1 United States

1.1 Procedural filibuster

1.2 Preparations

1.3 History

1.3.1 Early use

1.3.2 The 20th century and the emergence of cloture

1.3.3 Current practice

1.3.4 The filibuster today

2 Canada

2.1 Bill 103 - The Megacity Bill

3 UK Parliament

3.1 Filibusters in other legislatures on the British model

4 France

5 Fictional representations of filibusters

6 See also

7 References

7.1 Notes

7.2 Media

[edit] United States

[edit] Procedural filibuster

In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters, in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster can therefore be as powerful as an actual filibuster. Previously the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently they need only indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture.

[edit] Preparations

Preparations for a filibuster can be very elaborate. Sometimes cots are brought into the hallways or cloakrooms for senators to sleep on. According to Newsweek, "They used to call it 'taking to the diaper,' a phrase that referred to the preparation undertaken by a prudent senator before an extended filibuster. Strom Thurmond visited a steam room before his filibuster in order to dehydrate himself so he could drink without urinating. An aide stood by in the cloakroom with a pail in case of emergency."[3]

Filibusters have become much more common in recent decades. Twice as many filibusters took place in the 1991-1992 legislative session as took place in the entire nineteenth century.[4]

[edit] History

[edit] Early use

In 1789, the first U.S. Senate adopted rules allowing the Senate "to move the previous question," ending debate and proceeding to a vote. In 1806, Aaron Burr argued that the motion regarding the previous question was redundant, had only been exercised once in the preceding four years,[5] and should be eliminated. The Senate agreed, and thus the potentiality for a filibuster sprang into being. Because the Senate created no alternative mechanism for terminating debate, the filibuster became an option for delay and blocking of floor votes.

The filibuster remained a solely theoretical option until 1841, when the Democratic minority tried to block a bank bill favored by the Whig majority by using this political tactic. Senator Henry Clay, a promoter of the bill, threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate and he was unsuccessful in eliminating the filibuster with a simple majority vote.

[edit] The 20th century and the emergence of cloture

In 1917 a rule allowing for the cloture of debate (ending a filibuster) was adopted by the Democratic Senate[6] at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson.[7] From 1917 to 1949, the requirement for cloture was two-thirds of those voting.

In 1946 Southern Democrats blocked a vote on a bill proposed by Democrat Dennis Chavez of New Mexico (S. 101) that would have created a permanent Fair Employment Practices Committee (FEPC) to prevent discrimination in the work place. The filibuster lasted weeks, and Senator Chavez was forced to remove the bill from consideration after a failed cloture vote even though he had enough votes to pass the bill. As civil rights loomed on the Senate agenda, this rule was revised in 1949 to allow cloture on any measure or motion by two-thirds of the entire Senate membership; in 1959 the threshold was restored to two-thirds of those voting. After a series of filibusters led by Southern Democrats in the 1960s over civil rights legislation, the Democrat-controlled Senate[6] in 1975 revised its cloture rule so that three-fifths of the Senators sworn (usually 60 senators) could limit debate. Changes to Senate rules still require two-thirds of Senators voting. Despite this rule, the filibuster or the threat of a filibuster remains an important tactic that allows a minority to affect legislation. Strom Thurmond (D/R-SC) set a record in 1957 by filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 for 24 hours and 18 minutes, although the bill ultimately passed. Thurmond broke the previous record of 22 hours and 26 minutes set by Wayne Morse (I-OR) in 1953 protesting the Tidelands Oil legislation.

The filibuster has tremendously increased in frequency of use since the 1960s. In the 1960s, no Senate term had more than seven filibusters. In the first decade of the 21st century, no Senate term had fewer than 49 filibusters. The 1999-2002 Senate terms both had 58 filibusters. [1]

[edit] Current practice

Filibusters do not occur in legislative bodies in which time for debate is strictly limited by procedural rules. The House did not adopt rules restricting debate until 1842, and the filibuster was used in that body before that time.

Budget bills are governed under special rules called "reconciliation" which do not allow filibusters. Reconciliation once only applied to bills that would reduce the budget deficit, but since 1996 it has been used for all matters related to budget issues.

A filibuster can be defeated by the governing party if they leave the debated issue on the agenda indefinitely, without adding anything else. Strom Thurmond's attempt to filibuster the Civil Rights Act was defeated when Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson refused to refer any further business to the Senate, which required the filibuster to be kept up indefinitely. Instead, the opponents were all given a chance to speak and the matter eventually was forced to a vote.

According to a Historical Moments Essay on the U.S. Senate website, the Republican Party was the first to initiate a filibuster against a judicial nominee in 1968, forcing Democratic president Lyndon Johnson to withdraw the nomination of Associate Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas to be chief justice.

[edit] The filibuster today

In 2005, a group of Republican senators led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), responding to the Democrats' threat to filibuster some judicial nominees of President George W. Bush to prevent a vote on the nominations, floated the idea of making a rules change to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominees with the justification that the current Senate rules allowing such filibusters are unconstitutional. Senator Trent Lott, the junior Republican senator from Mississippi, named the plan the "nuclear option." Republican leaders later referred to the plan as the "constitutional option," though opponents and some supporters of the plan continue to use "nuclear option."

On May 23, 14 senators — seven Democrats and seven Republicans — led by John McCain (R-AZ) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) brokered a deal to allow three of Bush's nominees a vote on the Senate floor while leaving two others subject to a filibuster. The seven Democrats promised not to filibuster Bush's nominees except under "extraordinary circumstances," while the seven Republicans promised to oppose the nuclear option unless they thought a nominee was being filibustered that wasn't under "extraordinary circumstances." Specifically, the Democrats promised to stop the filibuster on Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William H. Pryor, Jr., who had all been filibustered in the Senate before. In return, the Republicans would stop the effort to ban the filibuster for judicial nominees. "Extraordinary circumstances" was not defined in advance. The term was open for interpretation by each Senator, but the Republicans and Democrats would have had to agree on what it meant if any nominee were to be blocked. Senator John Kerry led a failed filibuster against Judge (now Justice) Alito in January 2006, calling Alito's nomination an "extraordinary circumstance."

This agreement expired at the end of the second session of the 109th United States Congress (ended January 3, 2007).

Senate Democratic leadership allowed a filibuster on July 17, 2007 on debate about a variety of amendments to the 2008 defense authorization bill H.R. 1585, the Defense Authorization bill, specifically the Levin-Reed amendment S.AMDT.2087 to H.R.1585. The filibuster had been threatened by Republican leadership to prompt a cloture vote.

[edit] Canada

[edit] Bill 103 - The Megacity Bill

A unique form of filibuster was pioneered by the Ontario New Democratic Party in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in April 1997. To protest Progressive Conservative government legislation that would amalgamate the city of Toronto, Ontario, the small New Democratic caucus introduced 11,500 amendments to the megacity bill, created on computers with mail merge functionality. Each amendment would name a street in the proposed city, and provide that public hearings be held into the megacity with residents of the street invited to participate. The Ontario Liberal Party also joined the filibuster with a smaller series of amendments; a typical Liberal amendment would give a historical designation to a named street. The NDP then added another series of over 700 amendments, each proposing a different date for the bill to come into force.

The filibuster began on April 2 with the Abbeywood Trail amendment and occupied the legislature day and night, the members alternating in shifts. On April 4, exhausted and often sleepy government members inadvertently let one of the NDP amendments pass, and the handful of residents of Cafon Court in Etobicoke were granted the right to a public consultation on the bill (the government subsequently nullified this with an amendment of their own). On April 6, with the alphabetical list of streets barely into the E's, Speaker Chris Stockwell ruled that there was no need for the 230 words identical in each amendment to be read aloud each time, only the street name. With a vote still needed on each amendment, Zorra Street was not reached until April 8. The NDP amendments were then voted down one by one, eventually using a similar abbreviated process, and the filibuster finally ended on April 11.

External link: archive of the amendment debates in the Provincial Hansard. The filibuster extends from section L176B of the archive to L176AE; the Cafon Court slip-up is in section L176H, Stockwell rules on the issue of repetition in L176N, and Zorra Street is reached in L176S.

See Common Sense Revolution for more information.

[edit] UK Parliament

Procedural rules in the British House of Commons do not allow Members to speak on just any subject; they must stick to the topic of the debate.

In 1874, Joseph Gillis Biggar started making long speeches in the House of Commons, lower house of the Parliament of the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to delay the passage of Irish coercion acts. Charles Stewart Parnell, a young nationalist MP, who in 1880 became leader of the Irish Parliamentary Party, joined him in this tactic to obstruct the business of the House and force the Liberals and Conservatives to negotiate with him and his party. The tactic was enormously successful, and Parnell and his MPs succeeded in, for a time, forcing Parliament to take the "Irish question" of return to self-government seriously.

In 1983, Member of Parliament (MP) John Golding talked for over 11 hours during an all-night sitting at the committee stage of the British Telecommunications Bill. However, as this was at a standing committee and not in the Commons chamber, he was also able to take breaks to eat. The all-time Commons record for non-stop speaking, six hours, was set by Henry Brougham in 1828, though this was not a filibuster.

The 20th-Century record for the longest non-stop Commons speech is held by Conservative barrister Sir Ivan Lawrence. The then MP for Burton spoke for four hours 23 minutes during the Fluoridation Bill's committee stage on March 6, 1985.

The 21st-Century record was set on December 2, 2005 by Andrew Dismore, Labour MP for Hendon. Dismore spoke for three hours 17 minutes to block a Conservative Private Member's Bill, the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill, which he claimed amounted to "vigilante law".[8] Although Dismore is credited with speaking for 197 minutes, he regularly accepted interventions from other MPs who wished to comment on points made in his speech. Taking multiple interventions artificially inflates the duration of a speech, and is seen by many as a tactic to prolong a speech.

Filibustering can have consequences that were not expected or intended. In January 2000, filibustering orchestrated by Conservative Members of Parliament to oppose the Disqualifications Bill led to cancellation of the day's parliamentary business on Prime Minister Tony Blair's 1000th day in office. However, since this business included Prime Minister's Question Time, Conservative Leader William Hague was deprived of the opportunity of a high-profile confrontation with the Prime Minister.

On Friday, 20th April 2007, a Private Member's Bill aimed at exempting Members of Parliament from the Freedom of Information Act was 'talked out' by a collection of MPs, led by Liberal Democrats Simon Hughes and Norman Baker who debated for 5 hours, therefore running out of time for the parliamentary day and 'sending the bill to the bottom of the stack'. However, since there were no other Private Member's Bills to debate, it was resurrected the following Monday.[9]

[edit] Filibusters in other legislatures on the British model

The Northern Ireland House of Commons saw a notable filibuster in 1936 when Tommy Henderson (Independent Unionist MP for Shankill) spoke for nine and a half hours (ending just before 4 AM) on the Appropriation Bill. As this Bill applied government spending to all departments, almost any topic was relevant to the debate, and Henderson used the opportunity to list all his many criticisms of the Unionist government.

In the Southern Rhodesia House of Assembly, the Independent member Dr Ahrn Palley staged a similar all-night filibuster against the Law and Order Maintenance Bill in 1960.

[edit] France

In France, in August 2006, the left-wing opposition submitted 137,449 amendments to the proposed law bringing the share in Gaz de France owned by the French state from 80% to 34%, to allow for the merger between Gaz de France and Suez. Normal parliamentary procedure would require 10 years to vote on all the amendments.

The French constitution gives the government two options to defeat such a filibuster. The first one is through the use of the article 49 paragraph 3 procedure, according to which the law is adopted except if a majority is reached on a non-confidence motion. The second one is the article 44 paragraph 3 through which the government can force a global vote on all amendments it did not approve or submit itself.

In the end, the government did not have to use either of those procedures. As the parliamentary debate started, the left-wing opposition chose to withdraw all the amendments to allow for the vote to proceed. The "filibuster" was aborted because the opposition to the privatisation of Gaz de France appeared to lack support amongst the general population. It also appeared that this privatisation law could be used by the left-wing in the upcoming presidential election of 2007 as a political argument. Indeed, Nicolas Sarkozy, president of the Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (UMP - the right wing ruling party), Interior Minister, former Finance Minister and candidate to the presidency, had previously promised that the share owned by the French government in Gaz de France would never go below 70%.

[edit] Fictional representations of filibusters

The 1939 film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington climaxes with a young Junior Senator Jefferson Smith (played by Jimmy Stewart), astonished to discover the corruption of his mentor, staging a filibuster to prevent his expulsion from the chamber long enough to expose the corruption.

In the King of the Hill episode Flush with Power, a drought brings forth ordinance 631-A, a law which makes "lo-flo" toilets mandatory (which in reality waste more water than high-capacity toilets). Hank joins the Heimlich County Board of Zoning and Resources in an attempt to repeal the ordinance, but his actions earn the chagrin of Nate Hashaway, fellow board member and owner of Hashaway Fixtures (the manufacturer of the toilets). At the time of the vote on his repeal of the ordinance, everyone but Hank votes nay. About to give up, Hank takes the advice of Peggy. He begins reciting musings written by Peggy, which is immediately apparent to Nate Hashaway as a filibuster, forcing other board members to use the lo-flo toilets and see first-hand how useless they are.

The Stackhouse Filibuster, the 39th episode of The West Wing.

[edit] See also

Look up Filibuster in

Wiktionary, the free dictionary.Constitution of the Roman Republic

Obstructionism

Nuclear option

[edit] References

[edit] Notes

^ United States Senate- "Filibusters and Cloture", retrieved October 11, 2007

^ Online Etymology Dictionary - "filibuster", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ Newsweek - "Filibuster: Not Like It Used to Be", retrieved February 14, 2006

^ Lazare, D. Frozen Republic, p.198

^ see M. Gold & D. Gupta, 28 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 205 at 215

^ a b United States Senate - "Party Division in the Senate, 1789-Present", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ United States Senate - "Filibuster and Cloture", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ BBC News - "MP's marathon speech sinks bill", retrieved February 14, 2007

^ BBC News

[edit] Media

BBC, "Filibustering," at BBC News, 16 July 2005.

BBC, "MP's marathon speech sinks bill" at BBC News, 2 Dec. 2005.

Sarah A. Binder and Sterven S. Smith, Politics or Principle: Filibustering in the United States Senate. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1996. ISBN 0-8157-0952-8

Eleanor Clift, "Filibuster: Not Like It Used to Be," Newsweek, 24 Nov. 2003.

Bill Dauster, "It’s Not Mr. Smith Goes to Washington: The Senate Filibuster Ain’t What it Used To Be," The Washington Monthly, Nov. 1996, at 34-36.

Alan S. Frumin, "Cloture Procedure," in Riddick's Senate Procedure, 282–334. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1992.

Garry Gamber, "Famous Filibusters in Our Political History"

Daniel Lazare, The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy. Harcourt, 1996. ISBN 0-15-100085-9

Jessica Reaves, "The Filibuster Formula," Time, 25 Feb. 2003.

U.S. Senate, "Filibuster and Cloture."

U.S. Senate, "Filibuster Derails Supreme Court Appointment."

[hide]v • d • eUnited States Congress

House of Representatives, Senate — 110th Congress

Members Current, Freshmen – House: Current by seniority, Former members | Senate: Current by age, Current by seniority; Former, Former still living, Expelled/censured, Longest serving, Classes

Leaders House: Speaker, Party leaders, Party whips, Dem. caucus, Rep. conference, Dean | Senate: President pro tempore (list), Party leaders, Assistant party leaders, Dem. Caucus (Chair, Secretary, Policy comm. chair), Rep. Conference (Chair, Vice-Chair, Policy comm. chair), Dean

Groups African Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, Caucuses, Committees, Demographics, Hispanic Americans, Senate Women, House Women

Agencies,

Employees &

Offices Architect of the Capitol, Capitol Guide Service (board), Capitol Police (board), Chiefs of Staff, GAO, Government Printing Office, Law Revision Counsel, Librarian of Congress, Poet laureate | House: Chaplain, Chief Administrative Officer, Clerk, Doorkeeper, Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Operations, Historian, Page (board), Parliamentarian, Postmaster, Reading clerk, Recording Studio, Sergeant at Arms | Senate: Chaplain, Curator, Historian, Librarian, Page, Parliamentarian, Secretary, Sergeant at Arms

Politics &

Procedure Act of Congress (list), Caucuses, Committees, Hearings, Joint session, Oversight, Party Divisions, Rider | House: Committees, History, Jefferson's Manual, Procedures | Senate: Committees, Filibuster, History, Traditions, VPs' tie-breaking votes

Buildings Botanic Garden, Capitol, Capitol Complex, Office buildings (House: Cannon, Ford, Longworth, O'Neill, Rayburn, Senate: Dirksen, Hart, Russell)

Research Biographical directory, Congressional Quarterly, Congressional Record, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, The Hill, Roll Call, THOMAS

Misc List of lists, Congressional districts (by area), Mace of the House, Power of enforcement, Scandals, Softball League

Websites: House of Representatives | Senate

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster"

Categories: Dutch loanwords | Parliamentary procedure | Politics of Canada | Terminology of the United States Senate

 

[FatMax]

As a pastor, I would never have the arrogance to tell someone how they should vote. That's an individual decision. But to tie their salvation to their vote is especially troubling to me.

My girlfriend's brother's Babtist church has the arrogance to tell people how to vote. They even let Republicans stump for candidate during their Sunday service. No joke.

I have no problem with churches providing voter's guides so that their congregations can be educated before they head to the polls. But to spell out specific issues that people "must" vote for in order to be a good _________ (Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, etc.) is just wrong. And to tell people that their salvation is at stake is just horrible, imo.

You're splitting hairs if you think there is much difference between a voting guide and telling people how to vote.

 

[sho nuff]

So no Roman Catholics are bothered by the fact that the bishops have tied their salvation to how they vote?

Nope.Because I realize those Bishops have no control over what my creator thinks of me.HTH