document_title: Declaration of war by the United States

question_text: when did the us declare war in world war 2

text: Declaration of war by the United States

text: History[edit]

text: The United States has formally declared war against foreign nations five separate times, each upon prior request by the President of the United States. Four of those five declarations came after hostilities had begun.[2] James Madison reported that in the Federal Convention of 1787, the phrase "make war" was changed to "declare war" in order to leave to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks but not to commence war without the explicit approval of Congress.[3] Debate continues as to the legal extent of the President's authority in this regard. Public opposition to American involvement in foreign wars, particularly during the 1930s, was expressed as support for a Constitutional Amendment that would require a national referendum on a declaration of war.[4] Several Constitutional Amendments, such as the Ludlow Amendment, have been proposed that would require a national referendum on a declaration of war.

text: After Congress repealed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in January 1971 and President Richard Nixon continued to wage war in Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution (Pub.L. 93–148) over the veto of Nixon in an attempt to rein in some of the president's claimed powers. The War Powers Resolution proscribes the only power of the president to wage war which is recognized by Congress.[5]

text: Declarations of war[edit]

text: Formal[edit]

text: The table below lists the five wars in which the United States has formally declared war against eleven foreign nations.[6] The only country against which the United States has declared war more than once is Germany, against which the United States has declared war twice (though a case could be made for Hungary as a successor state to Austria-Hungary).

text: In World War II, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Germany and Italy, led respectively by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, declared war on the United States, and the U.S. Congress responded in kind.[7][8]

text:
War
Declaration
Opponent(s)
Date of declaration
Votes
President
Result

Senate
House

War of 1812
Declaration of War upon the U.K.
 United Kingdom
June 18, 1812
19–13
79–49
James Madison
Treaty of Ghent (December 24, 1814)

Mexican–American War
"An Act providing for the Prosecution of the existing War between the United States and the Republic of Mexico."[9]
 Mexico
May 13, 1846
40–2
173–14
James K. Polk
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (February 2, 1848)

Spanish–American War
Declaration of War upon Spain
 Spain
April 25, 1898
42–35
310–6
William McKinley
Treaty of Paris (December 10, 1898)

World War I
Declaration of War upon Germany
 Germany
April 6, 1917
82–6
373–50
Woodrow Wilson
Treaty of Berlin (August 25, 1921)

Declaration of War upon Austria-Hungary[10][11]
 Austria-Hungary
December 7, 1917
74–0
365–1
1921 U.S.–Austrian Peace Treaty (August 24, 1921), 1921 U.S.-Hungarian Peace Treaty (August 29, 1921)

World War II
Declaration of War upon Japan
 Japan
December 8, 1941
82–0
388–1
Franklin D. Roosevelt
V-J Day, Japanese Instrument of Surrender (September 2, 1945), Treaty of San Francisco (September 8, 1951)

Declaration of War upon Germany
 Germany
December 11, 1941
88–0
393–0
V-E Day, German Instrument of Surrender (May 8, 1945), Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (September 12, 1990), Treaty of Vienna with Austria (May 15, 1955)

Declaration of War upon Italy
 Italy
90–0
399–0
Paris Peace Treaty (February 10, 1947)

Declaration of War upon Bulgaria
 Bulgaria
June 5, 1942
73–0
357–0

Declaration of War upon Hungary[10]
 Hungary
360–0

Declaration of War upon Romania[10]
 Romania
361–0

text: Undeclared wars[edit]

text: Military engagements authorized by Congress[edit]

text: In other instances, the United States has engaged in extended military combat that was authorized by Congress.

text:
War or conflict
Opponent(s)
Initial authorization
Votes
President
Result

Senate
House

Quasi-War
 France
An Act further to protect the commerce of the United States
July 9, 1798
18–4

John Adams
Treaty of Mortefontaine

First Barbary War
 Morocco
 Tripolitania

February 6, 1802[12]

Thomas Jefferson
War ended 1805

Second Barbary War
 Algiers
May 10, 1815[13]

James Madison
War ended 1816

Enforcing 1808 slave trade ban; naval squadron sent to African waters to apprehend illegal slave traders
 Slave traders and pirates
"Act in addition to the acts prohibiting the Slave Trade" 1819

James Monroe
1822 first African-American settlement founded in Liberia, 1823 U.S. Navy stops anti-trafficking patrols

Redress for attack on U.S. Navy's USS Water Witch
 Paraguay
1858.[14]

James Buchanan

Mexican Revolution

United States occupation of Veracruz

 Mexico
H.J.R. 251, 38 Stat. 770
April 22, 1914

337–37
Woodrow Wilson
Force withdrawn after six months. However, the Joint Resolution was likely used to authorize the Pancho Villa Expedition. In the Senate, "when word reached the Senate that the invasion had gone forward before the use-of-force resolution had been approved, Republicans reacted angrily" saying it was a violation of the Constitution, but eventually after the action had already started, a resolution was passed after the action to "justify" it since Senators did not think it was a declaration of war.[15][16]

Russian Civil War

Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War

 Commune of Estonia
 Far Eastern Republic
 Latvia
 Mongolian People's Party
 Russia
 Ukraine

1918[17]

Woodrow Wilson

Lebanon crisis of 1958
 Lebanese Opposition

 Al-Mourabitoun
 Lebanese Communist Party
 Progressive Socialist Party

H.J. Res. 117, Public Law 85-7, Joint Resolution "To promote peace and stability in the Middle East", March 9, 1957[18]
72–19
355–61
Dwight D. Eisenhower
U.S. forces withdrawn, October 25, 1958

Vietnam War

Laotian Civil War

Cambodian Civil War

 China
National United Front of Kampuchea

 Khmer Rouge
 Khmer Rumdo
 Khmer Việt Minh

 North Korea
 North Vietnam
 Pathet Lao
 South Vietnam

Việt Cộng

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, August 7, 1964
88–2
416–0
Lyndon B. Johnson
U.S. forces withdrawn under terms of the Paris Peace Accords signed January 27, 1973

Multinational Force in Lebanon
Shia and Druze militias; Syria
S.J.Res. 159
Pub.L. 98–119
September 29, 1983
54–46
253–156
Ronald W. Reagan
Forces withdrawn in 1984

Persian Gulf War
 Iraq
H.J.Res. 77
January 12, 1991.
52–47
250–183
George H.W. Bush
The United Nations Security Council drew up terms for the cease-fire, April 3, 1991

War in Afghanistan

Operation Enduring Freedom – Afghanistan
Operation Freedom's Sentinel

al-Qaeda insurgency in Yemen

Yemeni Civil War

Somali Civil War

Operation Enduring Freedom – Horn of Africa

War in North-West Pakistan

Moro conflict

Operation Enduring Freedom – Philippines

Iraqi Civil War

Operation Inherent Resolve

Syrian Civil War

Operation Inherent Resolve

Second Libyan Civil War

 Afghanistan

Quetta Shura

Taliban

Haqqani network
Mullah Dadullah Front

 al-Qaeda

055 Brigade
Al-Nusra Front

Khorasan group

al-Qaeda Emirate in Yemen

Aden-Abyan Islamic Army
Islamic Jihad of Yemen

al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula

Ansar al-Sharia

al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent
Lashkar al-Zil

 Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya
 Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin
 Islamic Jihad Union
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Jamaat-ul-Ahrar
Jundallah
Lashkar-e-Islam
 Lashkar-e-Jhangvi
 Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi
 Turkistan Islamic Party
 Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan

 High Council of the Islamic Emirate
 Fidai Mahaz

 al-Itihaad al-Islamiya
 Alliance for the Re-liberation of Somalia
 Harakat al-Shabaab Mujahedeen
 Hizbul Islam
 Islamic Courts Union
 Jabhatul Islamiya
 Mu'askar Anole
 Ras Kamboni Brigades

 Abu Sayyaf
 Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters
 Islamic State
 Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
 Maute group
 Khalifa Islamiyah Mindanao

S.J. Res. 23
September 14, 2001
98–0
420–1
George W. Bush

Iraq War[19]
 Iraq
H.J. Res. 114,
March 3, 2003
77–23
296–132
George W. Bush
Ba'athist Iraqi government deposed April 2003. U.S. combat operations ended August 31, 2010. War ended December 15, 2011. Destabilization of Iraq and emergence of ISIL in the region 2011–present.[20]

text: Military engagements authorized by United Nations Security Council Resolutions and funded by Congress[edit]

text: In many instances, the United States has engaged in extended military engagements that were authorized by United Nations Security Council Resolutions and funded by appropriations from Congress.

text:
Military engagement
Opponent(s)
Initial authorization
President
Result

Korean War
 China
 North Korea
 Soviet Union

UNSCR 84, 1950
Harry S. Truman
Korean Armistice Agreement,[21] 1953

Multinational Force in Lebanon
Shia militias, Druze militias, Syria
UNSCR 425, 1978
UNSCR 426, 1978

Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan
U.S. forces withdrew in 1984

Persian Gulf War
 Iraq
UNSCR 678, 1990
George H. W. Bush
UNSCR 689, 1991

Bosnian War
 Republika Srpska
UNSCR 770, 1992
UNSCR 776, 1992
UNSCR 836, 1993
Bill Clinton
Reflagged as IFOR in 1995, Reflagged as SFOR in 1996, Completed in 2004

Second Liberian Civil War
Peacekeeping
UNSCR 1497, 2003
George W. Bush
U.S. forces are withdrawn in 2003 after the UNMIL is established.

Haitian coup d'état
UNSCR 1529, 2004
UNSCR 1542, 2004

2004

First Libyan Civil War

2011 military intervention in Libya

Operation Odyssey Dawn
Operation Unified Protector

 Libya
UNSCR 1973, 2011
Barack Obama
Debellation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, October 31, 2011

text: Other undeclared wars[edit]

text:
Military engagement
Opponent(s)
President
Result

American Revolutionary War
 Great Britain

Quebec
Loyalists

German auxiliaries

 Hesse-Kassel
 Hesse-Hanau
 Hanover
 Waldeck
 Brunswick
 Ansbach
 Anhalt-Zerbst

Native Americans[22]

 Iroquois Confederacy

None
Peace of Paris

text: On at least 125 occasions, the President has acted without prior express military authorization from Congress.[23] These include instances in which the United States fought in the Philippine–American War from 1898–1903, in Nicaragua in 1927, as well as the NATO bombing campaign of Yugoslavia in 1999, and the 2017 missile strikes on Syria.

text: The United States' longest war was fought between approximately 1840 and 1886 against the Apache Nation. During that entire 46-year period, there was never more than 90 days of peace.[citation needed]

text: The Indian Wars comprise at least 28 conflicts and engagements. These localized conflicts, with Native Americans, began with European colonists coming to North America, long before the establishment of the United States. For the purpose of this discussion, the Indian Wars are defined as conflicts with the United States of America. They begin as one front in the American Revolutionary War in 1775 and had concluded by 1918. The United States Army still maintains a campaign streamer for Pine Ridge 1890–1891 despite opposition from certain Native American groups.[24]

text: The American Civil War was not an international conflict under the laws of war, because the Confederate States of America was not a government that had been granted full diplomatic recognition as a sovereign nation by other sovereign states.[25][26] The CSA was recognized by the United States government as a belligerent power, a different status of recognition that authorized Confederate warships to visit non-U.S. ports. This recognition of the CSA's status as a belligerent power did not impose any duty upon the United States to recognize the sovereignty of the Confederacy, and the United States never did so.

text: The War Powers Resolution[edit]

text: In 1973, following the withdrawal of most American troops from the Vietnam War, a debate emerged about the extent of presidential power in deploying troops without a declaration of war. A compromise in the debate was reached with the War Powers Resolution. This act clearly defined how many soldiers could be deployed by the President of the United States and for how long. It also required formal reports by the President to Congress regarding the status of such deployments, and limited the total amount of time that American forces could be deployed without a formal declaration of war.

text: Although the constitutionality of the act has never been tested, it is usually followed, most notably during the Grenada Conflict, the Panamanian Conflict, the Somalia Conflict, the Persian Gulf War, and the Iraq War[clarification needed]. The only exception was President Clinton's use of U.S. troops in the 78-day NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War.[citation needed] In all other cases, the President asserted the constitutional authority to commit troops without the necessity of Congressional approval, but in each case the President received Congressional authorization that satisfied the provisions of the War Powers Act.

text: On March 21, 2011, a number of lawmakers expressed concern that the decision of President Barack Obama to order the U.S. military to join in attacks of Libyan air defenses and government forces exceeded his constitutional authority because the decision to authorize the attack was made without Congressional permission.[27] Obama explained his rationale in a two-page letter, stating that as commander in chief, he had constitutional authority to authorize the strikes, which would be limited in scope and duration, and necessary to prevent a humanitarian disaster in Libya.


document_title: United we stand, divided we fall

question_text: who said together we stand divided we fall

root

text: United we stand, divided we fall

text: Historical origin[edit]

text: The phrase has been attributed to the ancient Greek storyteller Aesop, both directly in his fable "The Four Oxen and the Lion"[1] and indirectly in "The Bundle of Sticks".[2]

tag: p

text: A similar phrase also appears in the biblical New Testament – translated into English from the historic Greek in Mark 3:25 as "And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand". Similar verses of the New Testament include Matthew 12:25 ("And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand") and Luke 11:17 ("But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.").

text: Use in U.S. history[edit]

text: The first attributed use in modern times is to Founding Father John Dickinson in his pre-Revolutionary War song "The Liberty Song", first published in the Boston Gazette in July 1768. In the song Dickinson wrote: "Then join hand in hand, brave Americans all! By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall!" Kentucky entered the Union on June 1, 1792. A little over six months later, on December 20, 1792, the first Kentucky General Assembly adopted the official seal of the Commonwealth, including the state motto, United We Stand, Divided We Fall.

text: Patrick Henry used the phrase in his last public speech, given in March 1799, in which he denounced The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Clasping his hands and swaying unsteadily, Henry declaimed, "Let us trust God, and our better judgment to set us right hereafter. United we stand, divided we fall. Let us not split into factions which must destroy that union upon which our existence hangs." At the end of his oration, Henry fell into the arms of bystanders and was carried, almost lifeless, into a nearby tavern. Two months afterward, he died.

text: During his unsuccessful campaign (technically speaking) against Stephen Douglas in 1858, Abraham Lincoln gave a speech centered on the House divided analogy to illustrate the need for a universal decision on slavery across all states.

text: Since 1942, this phrase has been the official non-Latin state motto of Kentucky.[3] The U.S. state of Kentucky's first governor, Isaac Shelby, was particularly fond of the stanza from "The Liberty Song".

text: On the Missouri flag, the phrase is also written around the center circle.

text: Modern political uses[edit]

text: Examples of political uses outside the U.S. include the following:

text:
This statement was also a common phrase used in India to garner political support during struggle for independence from the British Empire.
The motto is also used by Ulster loyalists, and can be seen in some loyalist Northern Irish murals.
The Economist edition that appeared during Brexit was entitled "Divided we fall".
The president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, used the motto in his letter of invitation to the heads of state and government of the EU, for their informal summit in Valletta, Malta, on February 3, 2017. Tusk addressed the motto to the leaders of the 27 member states of the future EU without the United Kingdom.[4]

tag: ul

text: Popular culture[edit]

text: Examples in popular culture include the following:

text:
The lyrics "United we stand, divided we fall" are featured in the song "United We Stand" performed by The Brotherhood of Man (written by Tony Hiller and Peter Simons). This song was also performed by Sonny and Cher and Elton John.
Geraldo Pino used the phrase in the song "Shake Hands".
In the song "Hey You" performed and written by the band Pink Floyd, a similar term with the same meaning, "Together we stand, divided we fall", is used.
Tupac Shakur used the line "united we stand, divided we fall.." in the song "Last Wordz" of his second album Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z. featuring Ice Cube and Ice-T.
Wilbert Harrison used the similar "Together we'll stand, Divided we'll fall" in his song "Let's Work Together".
In the Sum 41 song "Confusion And Frustration In Modern Times", the phrase "Divided we stand, Together we fall" is used. New York Hardcore punk band Agnostic Front use the lyrics "United we stand, divided we fall, Gotta gotta go" in their song "Gotta Go", which was featured on Punk-O-Rama Vol. 3. Punk band Smoke or Fire also used the reverse lyric "United we stand, divided we'll fall" in their song "What Separates Us All", from their 2007 album This Sinking Ship.
The Dutch band Heideroosjes use the lyrics in their song "Time is Ticking Away". It is also used in The Dropkick Murphys' "Boys on the Docks". The 3rd Mission in Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising is called "United we stand". A slightly different version is mentioned by the heavy metal band Judas Priest in his song "United" ("united we stand, united we never shall fall"). 3T also used the exact words on their debut album Brotherhood, the song being entitled "Brotherhood" also.
Australian artist Kid Mac used the phrase in his song titled "My Brothers Keeper" on his album titled No Man's Land.
The reverse was also used by Def Leppard in the song "When Love & Hate Collide", "..divided we stand, baby, united we fall" and in The Strokes song "Someday", "See, alone we stand, together we fall apart".
It also appears in the song "United", by the Finnish power metal group Stratovarius.
In the album Nero from Two Steps from Hell, one of the tracks is titled "United We Stand, Divided We Fall". It was also included on their subsequent album Archangel.
The phrase "United stand! Divided fall!" appears in the Norwegian folk metal/viking metal group Glittertinds song "Longships and Mead".
"Together we stand, divided we fall" is repeated various times in the song "Killing ground" by longtime English metal band Saxon.
Divided We Fall and United We Stand are events in the Marvel Comics series Ultimate Comics: The Ultimates.
The phrase also appeared in the "United We Stand" episode of Power Rangers Megaforce.
"United We Stand" and "Divided We Fall" are sequential songs in the Thomas Was Alone soundtrack.
Deathcore band Bring Me the Horizon uses the phrase "United we fail, divided we fall." in their song "Anti-vist."
J. K. Rowling in her book Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire says "We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided."[5]
In the C.G.I. Transformers show Transformers Prime, this phrase is played upon. As Megatron succeeds in destroying the Autobot base and chasing out the Autobots after an intense war, he and Starscream visit the ruins with Starscream commenting. "United we stand, divided they fall." Rather than attributing both values to one party, each is shown to have a respective value at that time, especially given Starscream has recently rejoined the Decepticons.
The statement is used in videos released in 2012[6] by the "hacktivist" group Anonymous.
S Club 7 said it in their TV shows Miami 7, L.A.7 and Viva S Club and when they did it they would get hurt by the lightning.
"For together we stand, divided we fall" is mentioned in the opening line of the chorus for the Donna Cruz song "Yesterday's Dream".
Asian Dub Foundation said in their song called "The Judgement": "Present and the future we will never fall/Realize united we stand and divided we fall"
The 2013 video game Grand Theft Auto V features a variant of the phrase; 'United We Stand, Together We Fall - Thanks for the bailout America' in an in-game commercial for the car manufacturer Bravado.
Marvel Studios repeated the phrase, "United We Stand, Divided We Fall," during their Super Bowl 50 ad for Captain America: Civil War.
In Fallout 4 while gaining entrance to the armory room at the Castle, the password for the terminal is "United We Stand". "United We Stand" is also the name of the perk the player gets for reaching the highest rank of character affinity with Preston Garvey, a key member of the Commonwealth Minutemen faction. The perk makes the player deal 20% more damage and provides +20 damage resistance when fighting against three or more enemies.
Norwegian Black Metal band Darkthrone named one song on their album Hate Them "Divided We Stand".
The verse is used repetitively in British cabaret trio Fascinating Aïda's Brexit reaction song.
The Phrase "Divided We Fall" is used as the title of a play by Bryan Starchman, emphasizing the need for troubled teenagers to come together in order to stand as one and help each other cope with various problems.


document_title: The End (Beatles song)

question_text: who played drums on the end by the beatles

text: The End (Beatles song)

text: Composition and recording[edit]

text: McCartney said, "I wanted [the medley] to end with a little meaningful couplet, so I followed the Bard and wrote a couplet."[2] In his 1980 interview with Playboy, John Lennon acknowledged McCartney's authorship by saying, "That's Paul again ... He had a line in it, 'And in the end, the love you get is equal to the love you give,' which is a very cosmic, philosophical line. Which again proves that if he wants to, he can think."[3] Lennon misquoted the line; the actual words are, "And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."[4]

text: Recording began on 23 July 1969, when the Beatles recorded a one-minute, thirty-second master take that was extended via overdubs to two minutes and five seconds. At this point, the song was called "Ending."[5] The first vocals for the song were added on 5 August, additional vocals and guitar overdubs were added on 7 August, and bass and drums on 8 August, the day the Abbey Road cover picture was taken.[6] Orchestral overdubs were added 15 August, and the closing piano and accompanying vocal on 18 August.[7]

text: All four Beatles have a solo in "The End", including a Ringo Starr drum solo. Starr disliked solos; he preferred to cater drumwork to whoever sang in a particular performance.[8] The take in which he performed the solo originally had guitar and tambourine accompaniment,[5] but other instruments were muted during mixing giving the effect of a drum solo. The additional instruments were restored for a remix on the Anthology 3 compilation album.[9] The drum solo was also later used at the beginning of "Get Back" on the 2006 album Love.

text: McCartney, Harrison, and Lennon perform a rotating sequence of three, two-bar guitar solos.[1][10] The solos begin approximately 53 seconds into the song and end just before the final piano part. Lennon described it in his 1970 interview with Rolling Stone: "There's a nice little bit I played on Abbey Road. Paul gave us each a piece, a little break where Paul plays, George plays and I play."[11] The first two bars are played by McCartney, the second two by Harrison, and the third two by Lennon, then the sequence repeats.[1] Each has a distinctive style which McCartney felt reflected their personalities: McCartney's playing included string bends similar to his lead guitar work on "Another Girl" from the Help! album and the stinging style he had first perfected on "Taxman" from Revolver; Harrison's solo incorporated the melodic yet technically advanced slides that were becoming his trademark; lastly Lennon's contribution was rhythmic, snarling, and had the heaviest distortion, echoing his lead work in "Revolution". Immediately after Lennon's third solo, the piano chords of the final line "And in the end..." begin. Then the orchestration arrangement takes over with a humming chorus and Harrison playing a final guitar solo that ends the song.

text: The rough version of "The End" that concludes the Anthology 3 is followed by a slow fade-in and fade-out of a piano chord, which acts as a mirror to the long chord that ends "A Day in the Life".

text: "The End" was initially intended to be the final track on Abbey Road, but it ended up being followed by "Her Majesty".

text: Although "The End" stands as the last known new recording involving all four members of the Beatles, one additional song, "I Me Mine", would be recorded by three members of the group (Lennon being absent due to being on holiday in Denmark) in January 1970 for the album Let It Be.

text: Musical structure[edit]

text: The song commences in A major, with an initial I–IV–II–V–I structure matching the vocals on "Oh, yeah, all right!" This is followed by a ♯iv dim–I pattern (D♯dim to A chord) on "dreams tonight." During this, the accompanying bass and one guitar move chromatically from A to B and D♯, while the second guitar harmonises a minor third higher to reach F♯.[12] An eight bar drum solo as a final statement of recognition to their "steady, solid drummer"[13] ends with a crescendo of eighth notes and bass and rhythm guitar in seventh chords to the chant "Love you."[14] The sequential three guitar solos rotate through I7 (A7 chord)–IV7 (D7 chord) changes in the key of A in a mix of "major and minor pentatonic scales with slides, double-stops, repeated notes, low-bass string runs and wailing bends".[15] Gould terms these live studio takes "little character sketches":

text: Paul opens with a characteristically fluid and melodically balanced line that sounds a high A before snaking an octave down the scale; George responds by soaring to an even higher D and sustaining it for half a bar before descending in syncopated pairs of 16th notes; John then picks upon the pattern of George's 16ths with a series of choppy thirds that hammer relentlessly on the second and flattened seventh degrees of the scale. The second time through, Paul answers John's blusey flattened 7ths with bluesy minor thirds and then proceeds to echo George's earlier line, spiraling up to that same high D; George responds with some minor thirds of his own, while mimicking the choppy rhythm of John's part; John then drops two octaves to unleash a growling single-note line. On this final two-bar solo, Paul plays almost nothing but minor thirds and flattened sevenths in a herky-jerky rhythm that ends with a sudden plunge to a low A; George then reaches for the stars with a steeply ascending line that is pitched an octave above any notes heard so far; and John finishes with a string of insistent and heavily distorted 4ths, phrased in triplets, that drag behind the beat and grate against the background harmony.[14]

text: The final "Ah" is in C with a spiritually evocative Plagal cadence IV–I (F–C chord) on piano while the voices do an F to E shift.[16] "And in the end the love you take" is in A major, but the G/A chord supporting the word "love" begins to dissolve our certainty that we are in A, by adding a ♭VII. The next line shifts us to the fresh key of C, with a iv (F) chord that threatens the dominance of the departing A key's F♯: "Is eq-ual" (supported successively by IV (F)–iii (Em) chords with an A–G bass line) "to the love" (supported successively by ii (Dm)–vi (Am)–ii7 (Dm7) chords with a F–E bass line) "you make" (supported by a V7 (G7) chord).[17] The final bars in the key of C involve a I–II–♭III rock-type progression and a IV–I soothing cadence that appear to instinctively reconcile different musical genres.[18]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Richie Unterberger of Allmusic considered "The End" to be "the group's take on the improvised jamming common to heavy rock of the late '60s, though as usual The Beatles did it with far more economic precision than anyone else."[19] John Mendelsohn of Rolling Stone said it was "a perfect epitaph for our visit to the world of Beatle daydreams: 'The love you take is equal to the love you make.'"[20]

text: Legacy[edit]

text:
The song is included as the encore on The Beatles: Rock Band.
McCartney's second guitar solo, Lennon's last guitar solo and Starr's drum solo were used in the intro to "Get Back" in the Beatles' Love.
In Ralph Bakshi's 1972 film Fritz the Cat, Fritz quotes the line "the love you give is equal to the love you get" when deciding not to plant a bomb in a nuclear power plant and rejecting violent revolutionary politics. The character's creator, Robert Crumb, denounced this dialogue as "red-neck and fascistic".[21]
The Beastie Boys sampled a portion of "The End" for their track "The Sounds of Science" from Paul's Boutique.[22]
Chris Farley famously asked McCartney on the Chris Farley Show skit on Saturday Night Live, whether it was true that "the love you take is equal to the love you make." McCartney replied, to Farley's delight, that, in his experiences, it was, saying "the more you give, the more you get."
Paul McCartney performed the closing couplet of "The End" at the 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony just prior to closing the event with a performance of the song "Hey Jude."
Peter Brown used the song's lyric as the title of his book about the Beatles, The Love You Make.
The closing couplet is sung by k.d. lang and partly spoken by Robin Williams (as the character Lovelace) at the end of the movie Happy Feet.
The final episode of the long-running, American TV series ER (1994–2009) is titled after some of the song's lyrics, "And in The End ...".

text: Cover versions[edit]

text:
When Mojo released Abbey Road Now! in 2009, part of a continuing series of CDs of Beatles albums covered track-by-track by modern artists, "The End" was covered by The Loose Salute.[23]
Beatallica covered the song using the melody of Metallica's "The End of the Line".[24]

text: Personnel[edit]

text:
Paul McCartney – lead and backing vocals, bass guitar, piano, guitar solo
John Lennon – backing vocals, rhythm guitar, guitar solo
George Harrison – backing vocals, rhythm and lead guitar, guitar solo
Ringo Starr – drums, backing vocals on the "Love you" chorus

text: George Martin – orchestration[7]

text: Notes[edit]

text:
^ Jump up to: a b c d MacDonald 2005, p. 361.
Jump up ^ Miles 1997, p. 558.
Jump up ^ Sheff 2000, p. 204.
Jump up ^ Hal Leonard 1993, pp. 252–253.
^ Jump up to: a b Lewisohn 1988, p. 181.
Jump up ^ Lewisohn 1988, pp. 185–186.
^ Jump up to: a b Lewisohn 1988, p. 190.
Jump up ^ Larry King Show 2007.
Jump up ^ Apple Records 1996.
Jump up ^ The Beatles 2000, p. 337.
Jump up ^ Wenner 2000, p. 22.
Jump up ^ Dominic Pedler. The Songwriting Secrets of the Beatles. Music Sales Limited. Omnibus Press. NY. 2003. pp. 392–394
Jump up ^ Jonathan Gould. Can't Buy Me Love: The Beatles, Britain and America. Piatkus 2007 pp. 589–590.
^ Jump up to: a b Gould, p. 590
Jump up ^ Pedler, p. 669
Jump up ^ Pedler, p. 33
Jump up ^ Pedler, pp. 669–670
Jump up ^ Pedler, p. 671
Jump up ^ Unterberger 2007.
Jump up ^ Mendelsohn 1969.
Jump up ^ Maremaa, Thomas (2004) [1972]. "Who Is This Crumb?". In Holm, D. K. R. Crumb: Conversations. Univ. Press of Mississippi. p. 28. ISBN 1-57806-637-9.
Jump up ^ Search
Jump up ^ "Abbey Road Now - Track Listing - Mojo Cover CDs - The Definitive List".
Jump up ^ "Beatallica - Carry That Weight is another Jaymz tune, so... - Facebook".

tag: ol


document_title: Sophia (robot)

question_text: when did sophia the robot get her citizenship

text: Sophia (robot)

text: History

text: Sophia was created by Hanson Robotics in collaboration with AI developers, including Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc, who built her voice recognition system, and SingularityNET, which powers her brain[5].

text: Sophia was activated on April 19, 2015.[6] The robot is modeled after actress Audrey Hepburn,[7] and is known for its human-like appearance and behavior compared to previous robotic variants. According to the manufacturer, David Hanson, Sophia uses artificial intelligence, visual data processing and facial recognition. Sophia also imitates human gestures and facial expressions and is able to answer certain questions and to make simple conversations on predefined topics (e.g. on the weather).[8] The robot uses voice recognition technology from Alphabet Inc. (parent company of Google) and is designed to get smarter over time.[6] Sophia's intelligence software is designed by SingularityNET.[9] The AI program analyses conversations and extracts data that allows it to improve responses in the future.[10]

text: Hanson designed Sophia to be a suitable companion for the elderly at nursing homes, or to help crowds at large events or parks. He has said that he hopes that the robot can ultimately interact with other humans sufficiently to gain social skills.[11]

text: Sophia has seven robot humanoid “siblings” who were also created by Hanson Robotics[12]. Fellow Hanson robots are Alice, Albert Einstein Hubo, Bina48, Han, Jules, Professor Einstein, Philip K. Dick Android, Zeno[13], and Joey Chaotic[14]. In December 2017, fellow Hanson robot BINA48 passed a college course on philosophy and love at Notre Dame de Namur University[15].

text: Features

text: Cameras within her eyes combined with computer algorithms allow Sophia to see. She can follow faces, sustain eye contact, and recognize individuals. She is able to process speech and have conversations using Alphabet’s Google Chrome voice recognition technology and other tools[16].

text: Sophia is conceptually similar to the computer program ELIZA, which was one of the first attempts at simulating a human conversation.[17] The software has been programmed to give pre-written responses to specific questions or phrases, like a chatbot. These responses are used to create the illusion that the robot is able to understand conversation, including stock answers to questions like "Is the door open or shut?"[18] The information is shared in a cloud network which allows input and responses to be analysed with blockchain technology.[19]

text: David Hanson has said that Sophia would ultimately be a good fit to serve in healthcare, customer service, therapy and education[20].

text: Sophia runs on artificially intelligent software that is constantly being trained in the lab, so her conversations are likely to get faster, Sophia's expressions are likely to have fewer errors, and she should answer increasingly complex questions with more accuracy[21].

text: Public Figure

text: On November 21, 2017 Sophia was named the United Nations Development Programme’s first ever Innovation Champion for Asia and the Pacific[22]. The announcement was made at the Responsible Business Forum in Singapore, an event hosted by the UNDP in Asia and the Pacific and Global Initiatives. As part of her role, Sophia will help to unlock innovation to work toward achieving the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals. On stage, she was assigned her first task by UNDP Asia Pacific Chief of Policy and Program, Jaco Cilliers[23].

text: Sophia has appeared on CBS 60 Minutes with Charlie Rose[24], Good Morning Britain with Piers Morgan[25], and outlets like CNBC, Forbes, Mashable, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Guardian. Sophia was featured in AUDI’s annual report[26] and was on the cover of ELLE Brasil magazine[27]. Sophia has also appeared in videos and music videos, including The White King, and as the lead female character in pop singer Leehom Wong’s music video A.I.[28]

text: Events

text: Sophia has been interviewed in the same manner as a human, striking up conversations with hosts. Some replies have been nonsensical, while others have impressed interviewers such as 60 Minutes' Charlie Rose.[10] In a piece for CNBC, when the interviewer expressed concerns about robot behavior, Sophia joked that he had "been reading too much Elon Musk. And watching too many Hollywood movies".[29] Musk tweeted that Sophia could watch The Godfather and suggested "what's the worst that could happen?"[7] Business Insider's chief UK editor Jim Edwards interviewed Sophia, and while the answers were "not altogether terrible", he predicted it was a step towards "conversational artificial intelligence".[30]

text: On October 11, 2017, Sophia was introduced to the United Nations with a brief conversation with the United Nations Deputy Secretary-General, Amina J. Mohammed.[31] On October 25, at the Future Investment Summit in Riyadh, the robot was granted Saudi Arabian citizenship, becoming the first robot ever to have a nationality.[32][7] This attracted controversy as some commentators wondered if this implied that Sophia could vote or marry, or whether a deliberate system shutdown could be considered murder. Social media users used Sophia's citizenship to criticize Saudi Arabia's human rights record.[33][34] As explained by Ali Al-Ahmed, director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, "Women (in Saudi Arabia) have since committed suicide because they couldn’t leave the house, and Sophia is running around [without a male guardian]. Saudi law doesn’t allow non-Muslims to get citizenship. Did Sophia convert to Islam? What is the religion of this Sophia and why isn’t she wearing hijab? If she applied for citizenship as a human she wouldn’t get it."[35][36] In December 2017, Sophia's creator David Hanson said in an interview that Sophia will use her citizenship to advocate for women's rights in her now country of citizenship; Newsweek criticized that "What (Hanson) means, exactly, is unclear".[37].

text: Reception in the scientific community

text: According to Quartz, experts who have reviewed the robot's open-source code state that Sophia is best categorized as a chatbot with a face.[18] Many experts in the AI field disapprove of Sophia's overstated presentation. Ben Goertzel, the chief scientist for the company that made Sophia, acknowledges that it is "not ideal" that some think of Sophia as having human-equivalent intelligence, but argues Sophia's presentation conveys something unique to audiences: "If I show them a beautiful smiling robot face, then they get the feeling that 'AGI' (artificial general intelligence) may indeed be nearby and viable... None of this is what I would call AGI, but nor is it simple to get working." Goertzel added that Sophia does utilize AI methods including face tracking, emotion recognition, and robotic movements generated by deep neural networks. Sophia’s dialogue is generated via a decision tree, but is integrated with these outputs uniquely.[38]

text: According to The Verge, Hanson often exaggerates and "grossly misleads" about Sophia's capacity for consciousness, for example by telling Jimmy Kimmel in 2017 that Sophia was "basically alive".[38]

text: In January 2018, Facebook's director of artificial intelligence, Yann LeCun, tweeted that Sophia was "complete bullshit" and slammed the media for giving coverage to "Potemkin AI". In response, Goertzel stated that he had never pretended Sophia was close to human-level intelligence.[39]


document_title: Minister of Health and Family Welfare (India)

question_text: who is the health minister of india 2013

text:
Minister of Health and Family Welfare

Emblem of India

Incumbent
Jagat Prakash Nadda
since 26 May 2014

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare

Style
The Honourable

Member of
Cabinet of India

Appointer
President
on the advice of the Prime Minister

Inaugural holder
Rajkumari Amrit Kaur

Formation
15 August 1947

tag: table

text: The Minister of Health and Family Welfare is the head of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and one of the cabinet ministers of the Government of India. J P Nadda is the current Minister of Health and Family Welfare.[1]

text: List of Ministers of Health and Family Welfare[edit]

text:
Ministers Health and Family Welfare

Name
Portrait
Term of office
Political Party
Prime Minister
Reference

Rajkumari Amrit Kaur

1947
1957
Indian National Congress

Jawaharlal Nehru
[2]

Sushila Nayar

1962
1967
Indian National Congress

Indira Gandhi
[3]

Kodardas Kalidas Shah

1967
1971
[4]

Uma Shankar Dikshit

1971
1972
[5]

Karan Singh

1973
1977
Indian National Congress

Indira Gandhi
[4]

Raj Narain

24 March 1977
25 January 1979
Janata Party

Morarji Desai
[6]

Rabi Ray

25 January 1979
14 July 1979
[7]

28 July 1979
14 January 1980
Janata Party (Secular)

Charan Singh
[8]

Mohsina Kidwai

31 December 1984
24 June 1986
Indian National Congress

Rajiv Gandhi
[9]

P. V. Narasimha Rao

July 1986
February 1988
[10]

Rasheed Masood

21 April 1990
10 November 1990
Janata Dal
National Front

V. P. Singh
[11]

Sartaj Singh

16 May 1996
1 June 1996
Bharatiya Janata Party
National Democratic Alliance

Atal Bihari Vajpayee
[12]

C. P. Thakur

27 May 2000
30 June 2002
[13]

Sushma Swaraj

29 January 2003
22 May 2004
[14]

Anbumani Ramadoss

22 May 2004
April 2009
Pattali Makkal Katchi
United Progressive Alliance

Manmohan Singh

Ghulam Nabi Azad

22 May 2009
26 May 2014
Indian National Congress
United Progressive Alliance

Harsh Vardhan

26 May 2014
9 November 2014
Bharatiya Janata Party
National Democratic Alliance

Narendra Modi
[15]

Jagat Prakash Nadda

9 November 2014
Incumbent


document_title: The Lost World: Jurassic Park

question_text: where did they film jurassic park lost world

text: The Lost World: Jurassic Park

text: Plot[edit]

text: On Isla Sorna, an island off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica, a young girl named Cathy Bowman wanders around during a family vacation, and survives an attack by a swarm of Compsognathus. Her parents file a lawsuit against the genetics company InGen, now headed by John Hammond's nephew, Peter Ludlow, who plans to use Isla Sorna to alleviate the financial losses imposed by the incident that occurred at Jurassic Park four years earlier. Mathematician Dr. Ian Malcolm meets Hammond at his mansion. Hammond explains that Isla Sorna, abandoned years earlier during a hurricane, is where InGen created their dinosaurs before moving them to Jurassic Park on Isla Nublar. Hammond hopes to stop InGen by sending a team to Isla Sorna to document the dinosaurs, thus causing public support against human interference on the island. Ian, who survived the Jurassic Park disaster, is reluctant. After learning that his girlfriend, paleontologist Dr. Sarah Harding, is part of the team and is already on Isla Sorna, Ian agrees to go to the island, but only to retrieve her.

text: Ian meets his teammates, Eddie Carr, an equipment specialist and engineer, and Nick Van Owen, a video documentarian and activist. After arriving on the island, they locate Sarah and discover that Ian's daughter, Kelly, had stowed away in a trailer being used as a mobile base. They then watch as another InGen team – consisting of mercenaries, hunters, paleontologists, and Ludlow – arrive to capture several dinosaurs. Meanwhile, team leader Roland Tembo, a big-game hunter, hopes to capture a male Tyrannosaurus rex by luring it to the cries of its injured infant. That night, Ian's team sneak into the InGen camp and learn the captured dinosaurs will be brought to a newly proposed theme park in San Diego. This prompts Nick and Sarah to free the caged dinosaurs, wreaking havoc upon the camp.

text: Nick also frees the infant T. rex and takes it to the trailer to mend its broken leg. After securing Kelly with Eddie, Ian realizes the infant's parents are searching for it and rushes to the trailer. As soon as Ian arrives, the infant's parents emerge on both sides of the trailer. The infant is released to the adult T. rexes, which then attack the trailer, pushing it over the edge of a nearby cliff. Eddie soon arrives, but as he tries to pull the trailer back over the edge with an SUV, the adult T. rexes return and devour him. The trailer and the SUV plummet off the cliff. Ian, Sarah, and Nick are rescued by the InGen team, along with Kelly. With both groups' communications equipment and vehicles destroyed, they team up to search for the old InGen compound's radio station on foot. Dieter, a member of the InGen hunter team, is killed by a pack of Compsognathus.

text: The next night, the two adult T. rexes find the group's camp, as they had followed the infant's blood scent on Sarah's jacket. The female T. rex chases the group to a waterfall cave and devours the hunter team's dinosaur expert, Dr. Robert Burke, while Roland tranquilizes the male. Much of the remaining InGen team is killed by Velociraptors while fleeing through an elephant grass field. Nick runs ahead to the communications center at the InGen Worker's Village to call for rescue. After Ian, Sarah and Kelly reach the village, they evade raptors until a helicopter arrives and transports them off the island.

text: A freighter ship transports the male T. rex to San Diego, but crashes into the dock. After finding the ship's crew killed, a guard opens the cargo hold, accidentally releasing the T. rex, which escapes into the city and goes on a destructive rampage. Ian and Sarah retrieve the infant T. rex from InGen's unfinished Jurassic Park San Diego facility, and use it to lure the adult back to the ship. Ludlow tries to intervene, but is trapped in the cargo hold by the adult T. rex and is subsequently mauled to death by the infant. Before the adult can escape again, Sarah tranquilizes it while Ian closes the cargo hold doors. The T. rexes are escorted back to Isla Sorna, and Hammond says that the American and Costa Rican governments have agreed to declare the island a nature preserve, securing the island from any human interference. While Ian sits safe at home with his family, the T. rexes are seen grazing with their infant as Hammond affirms "life will find a way".

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Jeff Goldblum as Dr. Ian Malcolm,[5] a mathematician and chaos theorist, and a survivor of the events on Isla Nublar from the first film.
Julianne Moore as Dr. Sarah Harding,[5] a behavioral paleontologist and Ian's girlfriend.
Pete Postlethwaite as Roland Tembo,[5] a big-game hunter from Kenya and the leader of the second InGen team.
Arliss Howard as Peter Ludlow,[5] InGen's current CEO and Hammond's conniving and greedy nephew. He is the main antagonist of the film.
Richard Attenborough as John Hammond,[5] InGen's former CEO and the park's original visionary.
Vince Vaughn as Nick Van Owen,[5] a well-traveled and experienced documentarian and environmentalist.
Vanessa Lee Chester as Kelly Curtis,[5] Ian's teenage daughter from a failed relationship.
Peter Stormare as Dieter Stark,[5] the InGen team's second-in-command, under Roland Tembo.
Harvey Jason as Ajay Sidhu,[5] Roland's immensely loyal and long-time best friend and hunting partner from India.
Richard Schiff as Eddie Carr,[5] a timid and sardonic field equipment expert.
Thomas F. Duffy as Dr. Robert Burke,[5] the InGen team's dinosaur expert.[6][7]
Joseph Mazzello as Tim Murphy,[5] John Hammond's grandson, Lex's younger brother and a survivor of the events on Isla Nublar.
Ariana Richards as Lex Murphy,[5] John Hammond's granddaughter, Tim's older sister and a survivor of the events on Isla Nublar.
Camilla Belle as Cathy Bowman, a girl attacked by Compsognathus.[8]
Robin Sachs as Paul Bowman, the father of Cathy Bowman.

text: Creatures on screen[edit]

text: While Jurassic Park featured mostly the animatronic dinosaurs built by Stan Winston's team, The Lost World had a higher emphasis on the computer-generated imagery of Industrial Light & Magic. This led to the film featuring larger shots that offered plenty of space for the digital artists to add the dinosaurs.[9] Although technology had not advanced much since the release of the first film, Spielberg noted that "the artistry of the creative computer people" had advanced: "There's better detail, much better lighting, better muscle tone and movement in the animals. When a dinosaur transfers weight from his left side to his right, the whole movement of fat and sinew is smoother, more physiologically correct."[10]

text: Winston said, "I wanted to show the world what they didn't see in 'Jurassic Park': more dinosaurs and more dinosaur action. 'More, bigger, better' was our motto."[11] Some of the animatronics cost $1 million and weighed nine and a half tons.[10] Michael Lantieri, the special effects supervisor, said, "The big T. rex robot can pull two Gs of force when it's moving from right to left. If you hit someone with that, you'd kill them. So, in a sense, we did treat the dinosaurs as living, dangerous creatures."[11]

text:
Compsognathus, nicknamed "Compies" by Stan Winston's crew, are a small carnivorous theropod which attacks in packs. Visual effects supervisor Dennis Muren considered them the most complex digital dinosaur, given their small size meant the Compys had their whole body visible and thus needed a higher sense of gravity and weight. A simple puppet Compsognathus was featured in the opening scene, and the part where Dieter Stark was killed by the pack had Peter Stormare wearing a jacket onto which various rubber Compies were attached.[9]
Gallimimus was shown fleeing from the InGen Hunters.
Mamenchisaurus was shown in the game trail scene where an InGen hunter drove his motorcycle in-between the sauropod's legs.
Pachycephalosaurus was shown being hunted down by the InGen hunters.
Parasaurolophus was shown being hunted down by the InGen hunters.
Stegosaurus was, according to Spielberg, included "by popular demand". Stan Winston's team built full-sized versions of both the infant and adult Stegosaurus, but Spielberg eventually opted to employ a digital version for the adults so they could be more mobile.[9]
Triceratops was shown being hunted down by the InGen hunters.

text:
Tyrannosaurus is featured as a whole family, with two adults and an infant. Featuring two practical T. rexes required double the work and puppeteers, and also to have the sets built around the animatronics so they would not need to leave the soundstage. The baby T. rex had two different practical versions, a "fully contained" remote controlled version the actors could carry, and a hybrid operated by both hydraulics and cables which lay on the operating table, and had the added complexity of moving as Vince Vaughn held its head.[9]
Velociraptor had a mechanical version which depicted the upper half of its body, and a digital full-motion computer raptor.[12]
Pteranodon makes a very brief appearance at the film's end.

text: Production[edit]

text: Pre-production[edit]

text: After the release of the novel Jurassic Park in 1990, Michael Crichton was pressured by fans for a sequel novel. Having never written a sequel, he initially refused.[13] While filming the novel's film adaptation, Jurassic Park, director Steven Spielberg believed that if a sequel film were made, it would involve the retrieval of a canister that contained dinosaur DNA and that was lost during the events of the first film.[14] Discussions about a sequel film began after the 1993 release of Jurassic Park, which became a financial success.[13] Spielberg held discussions with David Koepp and Crichton – who both wrote the previous film – to discuss possible ideas for a sequel film.[15] The production schedule for a second Jurassic Park film was dependent on whether Crichton would write a sequel to the first novel.[15]

text: In March 1994, Crichton said there would probably be a sequel novel and sequel film, stating that he had a story idea for another novel, which would then be adapted into a film sequel. By that time, Spielberg had not committed to directing the new novel's film adaptation, as he planned to take a year off from directing.[16] In March 1995, Crichton announced that he was nearly finished writing the novel sequel, scheduled for release later that year, although he declined to specify its title or plot. At the time of the announcement, Spielberg had signed on to produce the film adaptation, with filming to begin in summer 1996 for release in 1997. Spielberg, who was busy with his new DreamWorks studio, had not yet decided if he would direct the film, stating, "I'd love to direct it, but I just have to see. My life is changing."[17] Joe Johnston, who offered to direct the sequel, later directed the next film, Jurassic Park III.[18]

text: A production team was assembled in spring 1995, as Crichton was finishing the second novel, titled The Lost World; simultaneously, Spielberg and Koepp were developing ideas for the screenplay.[19] Crichton's novel was published in September 1995, while Spielberg was announced as director for the film adaptation in November 1995.[20] Production designer Rick Carter traveled to the Caribbean, New Zealand, and Central America to scout possible locations for filming.[19] By February 1996, northern New Zealand had been chosen as a filming location rather than Kauai, Hawaii, where the previous film was shot, as the filmmakers desired to shoot the new film in a different location that would not be recognized from its predecessor.[21] New Zealand was also chosen because it was believed to have better represented an actual dinosaur environment. Crichton had wished for the film to be shot on Kauai.[22]

text: In August 1996, it was announced that Humboldt County, California had been chosen as a filming location instead of New Zealand,[23] where filming would have been too costly.[24] Humboldt County was chosen because of financial incentives that would keep the film's production costs low.[24][25] Other locations that had been considered were Costa Rica and Oregon.[24][23] Filming locations in Humboldt County were to include the redwood forests of Eureka, California.[19] The location was picked because research indicated dinosaurs did not inhabit tropical habitats, but forests like the ones in Eureka.[9]

text: Writing[edit]

text: The plot for Crichton's Lost World novel involved a second island of dinosaurs, with no reference to the canister of dinosaur DNA[14] (the canister was later used as a plot aspect in a rejected early draft for Jurassic Park IV).[26] After the novel was finished, Crichton was not consulted about the sequel, and it was not until he declined to approve certain merchandising rights that he received a copy of the script. Kathleen Kennedy, the film's executive producer who previously produced Jurassic Park, said, "In the same way Michael doesn't see writing as a collaboration, Steven went off and did his own movie. When Michael turned the book over to Steven, he knew his work was finished."[10]

text: Spielberg and Koepp discarded much of the novel's scenes and ideas,[27] choosing to devise a new story instead while including the two ideas from the novel that Spielberg liked: a second island populated with dinosaurs, and a scene in which a trailer dangles from a cliff after being attacked by T. rexes.[10] To prepare for writing the script, Spielberg was more insistent on having Koepp watch the 1925 film, The Lost World, than he was on having him read Crichton's novel, which Koepp also did.[25]

text: During an early meeting with Koepp, Spielberg determined that while the primary conflict of the original film involved herbivorous dinosaurs vs. carnivorous dinosaurs, the script for the new film should involve humans who are "gatherers" (observers of the dinosaurs) and "hunters" (who capture the dinosaurs for a zoo).[25] Koepp said the plot of the 1962 film Hatari! – about African animals being captured for zoos – had "a big influence" on The Lost World's script.[28] Koepp named the characters of Roland Tembo and Nick Van Owen as a reference to one of his favorite songs, "Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner", by Warren Zevon. Koepp said "since Roland is a mercenary in the song, that seemed like a good name for the hunter-for-hire in our movie. While I was at it, I thought it would be fun to make his nemesis' last name Van Owen, like in the song."[29]

text: Crichton's novel revolves around Malcolm's team and a rival team led by InGen's corporate rival, Biosyn, which was written out of the film adaptation in favor of two competing InGen teams.[8] Several characters from the novel were excluded from the film adaptation, including Lewis Dodgson, the leader of the Biosyn team;[30] and field equipment engineer Doc Thorne, whose characteristics were partially implemented into the film's version of Eddie.[8] Spielberg regretted excluding a scene from the script that would have depicted characters on motorcycles attempting to flee velociraptors, similar to a sequence in the novel. An alternate version of the scene was later added into the 2015 film, Jurassic World.[31][32]

text: Dieter's death scene was ultimately inspired by John Hammond's death in the first novel, in which Procompsognathus kill him.[8][33] The film's opening scene was also inspired by an early chapter in the first novel that was ultimately excluded from its film adaptation, in which a girl on a beach is bitten by a Procompsognathus.[33] The first novel also included a scene in which characters hide behind a waterfall from a T. rex; this scene was briefly excluded from the first film as well, and was ultimately added into The Lost World: Jurassic Park.[33] According to paleontologist Jack Horner, the film's technical advisor, part of the waterfall scene was written in as a favor for him by Spielberg. Burke greatly resembles Horner's rival Robert Bakker. In real life, Bakker argues for a predatory T. rex while Horner views it as primarily a scavenger. Spielberg had Burke written into this part to have him killed by the T. rex as a favor for Horner. After the film came out, Bakker, who recognized himself in Burke and loved it, actually sent Horner a message saying, "See, I told you T. rex was a hunter!"[34]

text: In the original script, the film would briefly end with an aerial battle, where Pteranodons attack the helicopter trying to escape Isla Sorna.[12] Three weeks before filming began,[25] Spielberg ultimately suggested to instead have the T. rex's attack through San Diego, as he was interested in seeing dinosaurs attacking the mainland.[12] Spielberg had initially wanted such a scene to be saved for a third film, but later decided to add it into the second film after realizing that he would probably not direct another film in the series.[10] The sequence was inspired by a similar attack scene involving a Brontosaurus in London in the 1925 version of The Lost World, which was adapted from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 1912 novel of the same name,[35] both of which inspired the title for Crichton's novel.[36] Koepp wrote a total of nine drafts for the film.[25]

text: Casting[edit]

text: In November 1994, Richard Attenborough said that he would reprise his role as John Hammond from the previous film.[37] In 1995, Spielberg met Vanessa Lee Chester at the premiere of A Little Princess, in which she appeared. Chester later recalled, "As I was signing an autograph for him, he told me one day he'd put me in a film." Spielberg met with Chester the following year to discuss The Lost World: Jurassic Park before ultimately casting her as Malcolm's daughter, Kelly.[38] In April 1996, Julianne Moore was in discussions to star in the film alongside Jeff Goldblum.[39] Spielberg had admired Moore's performance in The Fugitive.[40] In June 1996, Peter Stormare was in final negotiations to join the cast.[41] In August 1996, Vince Vaughn was announced to have joined the cast.[42] Spielberg was impressed with Vaughn's performance in the film Swingers, which he saw after the filmmakers requested his permission to use music from his earlier film, Jaws.[43][44] After meeting with Spielberg, Vaughn was subsequently cast without having to do a screen test.[45]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Filming began on September 5, 1996, at Fern Canyon, a part of California's Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park. Filming continued for two weeks in other state parks and on private land in northern California, including Eureka. Throughout the fall of 1996, filming continued on stages at Universal Studios Hollywood.[46] The Site B workers village was constructed there and left intact after filming to become a part of the theme park tour.[19] For the scene where a trailer dangles from a cliff, a whole mountainside was built over the structure of Universal's multi-storey car park.[9]

text: In October 1996, it was announced that filming would take place over five days in December at New Zealand's Fiordland National Park,[47][48] where the film's opening sequence was to be shot.[49][50] Scenes involving Hammond's residence were shot during the final week of filming, at Mayfield Senior School in Pasadena, California.[51][40] Also shot in Pasadena was a scene in which Vaughn's character emerges from a lake.[45]

text: In early December 1996, plans to film in Fiordland were abruptly cancelled.[49][50] Principal photography concluded ahead of schedule on December 11, 1996.[46] However, in mid-December 1996, plans were approved to shoot the opening sequence on a beach in Kauai after the cancellation of the New Zealand shoot. Filming in Kauai was underway on December 20, 1996, with plans to conclude two days later. Although Spielberg was in Kauai at the time and had visited the production, the opening sequence was filmed by a second unit crew.[49][50] The film was shot on a budget of $73 million.[3]

text: Although the T. rex's rampage takes place in San Diego, only one scene is actually shot there, where the InGen helicopter flies over the wharf and banks towards the city. The other sequences were all shot in Burbank, California.[12] Scenes set in San Diego were shot behind barricades to maintain secrecy; Spielberg noted that, "It looked like road-repair work was going on."[10] Various members of the film crew were featured running from the Tyrannosaurus, with screenwriter David Koepp playing the "Unlucky Bastard" who gets eaten during a scene set in San Diego.[12]

text: Inspired by how Jurassic Park featured the Ford Explorer, Mercedes-Benz signed an endorsement deal to introduce in the film its first sports utility vehicle, the M320.[52] Spielberg did not allow for rehearsals among the cast, stating, "You want to capture the actors when they taste the words for the first time, when they look at each other for the first time–that's the sort of magic you can only get on a first or second take."[53] Cinematographer Janusz Kamiński, who had worked with Spielberg in Schindler's List, was brought onto the project to give a darker, more artistic look to the film, leading to a "more elegant and rich" approach focused on contrast and shadow.[9]

text: Music[edit]

text: This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2015)

text: For the sequel, composer John Williams avoided using most of the previous film's main themes, writing a more action oriented score.[54] The soundtrack was released on May 20, 1997. It, along with the soundtrack to the first movie, was re-released and remastered on November 29, 2016.[55]

text: Release[edit]

text: The Lost World: Jurassic Park premiered on May 19, 1997,[56] at a Cineplex Odeon theater in Universal City, California.[57][58] The Los Angeles Times called the premiere "low-key".[58] The film received a wider release on May 23, 1997. Fox Network paid $80 million for the broadcasting rights of The Lost World, which debuted on November 1, 1998.[59] The television version was expanded with deleted scenes, that included John Hammond's ouster by InGen executives.[60]

text: Marketing and promotion[edit]

text: On February 10, 1997, Universal announced a $250 million marketing campaign with 70 promotional partners.[61][62] The marketing campaign was even more extensive than with Jurassic Park. The leading partners were Burger King, whose promotion was concurrent with one for another Universal dinosaur-based franchise, The Land Before Time; JVC and Mercedes-Benz, whose products are featured in the movie; and Timberland Co., making its first film tie-in. Another partner was a then-sister company of Universal under Seagram, Tropicana Products.[61][63] Other promotional partners included Hamburger Helper[64][65] and Betty Crocker,[66] while General Mills introduced Jurassic Park Crunch cereal.[66][67] Derivative works included various video games, including both a pinball machine and an arcade game by Sega,[68] and a four-part comic series released by Topps Comics.[69][70]

text: Other promotional items included a toy line of action figures by Kenner and remote-controlled vehicles by Tyco,[62][71][72] as well as a board game by Milton Bradley Company.[73] Also produced were Hershey's chocolate bars that featured holographic dinosaur patterns.[74][71] Universal hoped for promotional profits to exceed $1 billion.[62]

text: In December 1996, a special version of the film's teaser trailer debuted at 42 theaters in the United States and Canada, at a cost of $14,000 for each theater; the trailer made use of synchronized strobe lights that mimicked lightning during a rain scene.[75] The film's first trailer was aired on January 26, 1997, during Super Bowl XXXI. A detailed website for the film was also created, and provided backstory for characters and events that were not referenced in the film.[76][77] Shortly after the film's release, hackers broke into the website and briefly changed the film's logo to feature a duck instead of a T. rex. The film's title in the logo was also changed to The Duck World: Jurassic Pond.[78] Universal denied that the hacking was a publicity stunt to promote the film, stating that it was traced to a "16-year-old hacker kid from back East."[79][80] The website was still online as of 2018.[77]

text: Home media[edit]

text: The film made its VHS and LaserDisc debut on October 21, 1997.[81] The DVD was first released on October 10, 2000, and also made available in a package with predecessor Jurassic Park.[82] The films were also featured in a deluxe limited edition box set featuring both the DVDs and soundtrack albums of the two films, two lenticulars, stills from both films, and a certificate of authenticity signed by all three producers of the set, all inside a collector case.[83] After the release of sequel Jurassic Park III, box sets including all three movies were also made available, as Jurassic Park Trilogy on December 11, 2001,[84] and as the Jurassic Park Adventure Pack on November 29, 2005.[85] The Lost World was first made available on Blu-ray on October 25, 2011 as part of a trilogy release.[86] The entire Jurassic Park film series was released on 4K UHD Blu-Ray on May 22, 2018.[87]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: The Lost World took in $72.1 million on its opening weekend ($92.6 million for the four-day Memorial Day holiday) in the U.S.,[88] which was the biggest opening weekend at the time,[89] surpassing the previous record-holder Batman Forever at $52.8 million. It held onto this record for four and a half years, until the release of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in November 2001. The Lost World took the record for highest single-day box office take of $26.1 million on May 25,[90] a record held until the release of Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace. It also became the fastest film to pass the $100 million mark, achieving the feat in just six days.[91] However, despite these records, its total box office gross fell below the total of the original film.[92] It grossed $229.1 million in the U.S. and $389.5 million internationally, for a total of $618.6 million worldwide,[3] becoming the second highest-grossing film of 1997 behind Titanic. The film sold an estimated 49,910,000 tickets in North America.[93]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 53% based on 68 reviews and an average rating of 5.6/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "The Lost World demonstrates how far CG effects have come in the four years since Jurassic Park; unfortunately, it also proves how difficult it can be to put together a truly compelling sequel."[94] On Metacritic, the film has an average rating of 59/100 based on reviews from 18 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".[95]

text: Roger Ebert, who gave the first film three stars, gave The Lost World only two, writing that "It can be said that the creatures in this film transcend any visible signs of special effects and seem to walk the earth, but the same realism isn't brought to the human characters, who are bound by plot conventions and action formulas."[5] Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune also gave the film two stars and said, "I was disappointed as much as I was thrilled because 'The Lost World' lacks a staple of Steven Spielberg's adventure films: exciting characters. [...] Even in the original 'Jurassic Park,' the dinosaurs – not to mention the human beings – had more distinct personalities than they have here. Save for superior special effects, 'The Lost World' comes off as recycled material."[96] Conversely, Kevin Thomas of the Los Angeles Times saw improved character development over the original, saying, "It seemed such a mistake in Jurassic Park to sideline early on its most interesting character, the brilliant, free-thinking and outspoken theorist Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) with a broken leg, but in its most inspired stroke, The Lost World brings back Malcolm and places him front and center," calling it "a pleasure to watch such wily pros as Goldblum and Attenborough spar with each other with wit and assurance".[97] The dinosaurs were even more developed as characters, with Stephen Holden of The New York Times saying, "The Lost World, unlike Jurassic Park, humanizes its monsters in a way that E.T. would understand."[4] Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly gave the film a B grade; he remarked, "Mr. T-Rex was cool in the first Spielberg flick, sure, but it wasn't until [it was in] San Diego that things got crazy-cool. It's the old 'tree falling in the woods' conundrum: Unless your giant monster is causing massive property damage, can you really call it a giant monster?"[98]

text: Spielberg confessed that during production he became increasingly disenchanted with the film, admitting, "I beat myself up... growing more and more impatient with myself... It made me wistful about doing a talking picture, because sometimes I got the feeling I was just making this big silent-roar movie... I found myself saying, 'Is that all there is? It's not enough for me.'"[99]

text: Awards and nominations[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text:
Award

Subject

Nominee

Result

Academy Awards

Best Visual Effects

Dennis Muren, Stan Winston, Randal M. Dutra and Michael Lantieri

Nominated

Saturn Awards

Best Special Effects

Nominated

Best Supporting Actor

Pete Postlethwaite

Nominated

Best Young Actress

Vanessa Lee Chester

Nominated

Best Fantasy Film

Nominated

Best DVD Collection

Nominated

Best Director

Steven Spielberg

Nominated

Rembrandt Awards

Won

MTV Movie Awards[100][101]

Best Action Sequence

T-Rex attacks San Diego

Nominated

Satellite Awards[102]

Best Motion Picture – Animated or Mixed Media

Nominated

Image Awards

Outstanding Youth Actor/Actress

Vanessa Lee Chester

Nominated

Grammy Awards

Best Instrumental Composition

John Williams

Nominated

Blockbuster Entertainment Awards

Favorite Actor – Sci-Fi

Jeff Goldblum

Nominated

Favorite Actress – Sci-Fi

Julianne Moore

Nominated

Golden Raspberry Awards

Worst Remake or Sequel

Nominated

Worst Reckless Disregard for Human Life and Public Property

Nominated

Worst Screenplay

David Koepp, based on the book by Michael Crichton

Nominated

Stinkers Bad Movie Awards[103]

Worst Screenplay for a Film Grossing More Than $100 Million Worldwide Using Hollywood Math

Nominated

Worst Sequel

Nominated


document_title: Epistle to the Romans

question_text: who was the book of romans addressed to

question_tokens: who was the book of romans addressed to

text: Epistle to the Romans

text: General presentation[edit]

text: In the opinion of Jesuit scholar Joseph Fitzmyer, the book "overwhelms the reader by the density and sublimity of the topic with which it deals, the gospel of the justification and salvation of Jew and Greek alike by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ, revealing the uprightness and love of God the Father."[2]

text: N. T. Wright notes that Romans is

text: ...neither a systematic theology nor a summary of Paul's lifework, but it is by common consent his masterpiece. It dwarfs most of his other writings, an Alpine peak towering over hills and villages. Not all onlookers have viewed it in the same light or from the same angle, and their snapshots and paintings of it are sometimes remarkably unalike. Not all climbers have taken the same route up its sheer sides, and there is frequent disagreement on the best approach. What nobody doubts is that we are here dealing with a work of massive substance, presenting a formidable intellectual challenge while offering a breathtaking theological and spiritual vision.[3]

text: Authorship[edit]

text: The scholarly consensus is that Paul authored the Epistle to the Romans.[additional citation(s) needed]

text: C. E. B. Cranfield, in the introduction to his commentary on Romans, says:

text: The denial of Paul's authorship of Romans by such critics ... is now rightly relegated to a place among the curiosities of NT scholarship. Today no responsible criticism disputes its Pauline origin. The evidence of its use in the Apostolic Fathers is clear, and before the end of the second century it is listed and cited as Paul's. Every extant early list of NT books includes it among his letters. The external evidence of authenticity could indeed hardly be stronger; and it is altogether borne out by the internal evidence, linguistic, stylistic, literary, historical and theological.[4]

text: Dating[edit]

text: The letter was most probably written while Paul was in Corinth, probably while he was staying in the house of Gaius, and transcribed by Tertius, his amanuensis.[5] There are a number of reasons why Corinth is considered most plausible. Paul was about to travel to Jerusalem on writing the letter, which matches Acts[Acts 20:3] where it is reported that Paul stayed for three months in Greece. This probably implies Corinth as it was the location of Paul’s greatest missionary success in Greece.[6] Additionally, Phoebe was a deacon of the church in Cenchreae, a port to the east of Corinth, and would have been able to convey the letter to Rome after passing through Corinth and taking a ship from Corinth’s west port.[6] Erastus, mentioned in Romans 16:23, also lived in Corinth, being the city's commissioner for public works and city treasurer at various times, again indicating that the letter was written in Corinth.[7]

text: The precise time at which it was written is not mentioned in the epistle, but it was obviously written when the collection for Jerusalem had been assembled and Paul was about to "go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints", that is, at the close of his second visit to Greece, during the winter preceding his last visit to that city.[8] The majority of scholars writing on Romans propose the letter was written in late 55/early 56 or late 56/early 57.[9] Early 55 and early 58 both have some support, while German New Testament scholar Gerd Lüdemann argues for a date as early as 51/52 (or 54/55), following on from Knox, who proposed 53/54. Lüdemann is the only serious challenge to the consensus of mid to late 50s.[10]

text: Subscriptions[edit]

text: Some manuscripts have a subscription at the end of the Epistle:

text:
προς Ρωμαιους ("to the Romans") is found in these manuscripts: Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Claromontanus;
προς Ρωμαιους εγραφη απο Κορινθου ("to the Romans it was written from Corinth"): B2, D2 (P);
προς Ρωμαιους εγραφη απο Κορινθου δια Φοιβης της διακονου ("to the Romans it was written from Corinth by Phoebus the deacon"): 42, 90, 216, 339, 462, 466*, 642;
εγραφη η προς Ρωμαιους επιστολη δια Τερτιου επεμφτη δε δια Φοιβης απο Κορινθιων της εν Κεγχρεαις εκκλησιας ("the epistle to the Romans was written by Tertius and was sent by Phoebus from the Corinthians of the church in Cenchreae"): only in 337;
προς Ρωμαιους εγραφη απο Κορινθου δια Φοιβης της διακονου της εν Κεγχρεαις εκκλησιας ("to the Romans it was written from Corinth by Phoebus the deacon of the church in Cenchreae"): 101, 241, 460, 466, 469, 602, 603, 605, 618, 1923, 1924, 1927, 1932, followed by Textus Receptus.[11]

text: Paul's life in relation to his epistle[edit]

text: For ten years before writing the letter (approx. 47–57), Paul had traveled around the territories bordering the Aegean Sea evangelizing. Churches had been planted in the Roman provinces of Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia and Asia. Paul, considering his task complete, wanted to preach the gospel in Spain, where he would not "build upon another man’s foundation".[Rom 15:20][12] This allowed him to visit Rome on the way, a long-time ambition of his. The letter to the Romans, in part, prepares them and gives reasons for his visit.[12]

text: In addition to Paul’s geographic location, his religious views are important. First, Paul was a Hellenistic Jew with a Pharisaic background (see Gamaliel), integral to his identity: see Paul the Apostle and Judaism for details. His concern for his people is one part of the dialogue and runs throughout the letter. Second, the other side of the dialogue is Paul’s conversion and calling to follow Christ in the early 30s.

text: The churches in Rome[edit]

text: The most probable ancient account of the beginning of Christianity in Rome is given by a 4th-century writer known as Ambrosiaster:[13]

text: It is established that there were Jews living in Rome in the times of the Apostles, and that those Jews who had believed [in Christ] passed on to the Romans the tradition that they ought to profess Christ but keep the law [Torah] ... One ought not to condemn the Romans, but to praise their faith, because without seeing any signs or miracles and without seeing any of the apostles, they nevertheless accepted faith in Christ, although according to a Jewish rite.[14]

text: From Adam Clarke:

text: The occasion of writing the epistle: ... Paul had made acquaintance with all circumstances of the Christians at Rome ... and finding that it was ... partly of heathens converted to Christianity, and partly of Jews, who had, with many remaining prejudices, believed in Jesus as the true Messiah, and that many contentions arose from the claims of the Gentiles to equal privileges with the Jews, and from absolute refusal of the Jews to admit these claims, unless the Gentile converts become circumcised; he wrote this epistle to adjust and settle these differences.[15]

text: At this time, the Jews made up a substantial number in Rome, and their synagogues, frequented by many, enabled the Gentiles to become acquainted with the story of Jesus of Nazareth. Consequently, churches composed of both Jews and Gentiles were formed at Rome. According to Irenaeus, a 2nd-century Church Father, the church at Rome was founded directly by the apostles Peter and Paul.[16] However, many modern scholars disagree with Irenaeus, holding that while little is known of the circumstances of the church's founding, it was not founded by Paul:[17]

text: Many of the brethren went out to meet Paul on his approach to Rome. There is evidence that Christians were then in Rome in considerable numbers and probably had more than one place of meeting.

text: Note the large number of names in Romans 16:3–15 of those then in Rome, and verses 5, 15 and 16 indicate there was more than one church assembly or company of believers in Rome. Verse 5 mentions a church that met in the house of Aquila and Priscilla. Verses 14 and 15 each mention groupings of believers and saints.[19]

text: Jews were expelled from Rome because of disturbances around AD 49 by the edict of Claudius.[20] Fitzmyer claims that both Jews and Jewish Christians were expelled as a result of their infighting.[21] Claudius died around the year AD 54, and his successor, Emperor Nero, allowed the Jews back into Rome, but then, after the Great Fire of Rome of 64, Christians were persecuted. Fitzmyer argues that with the return of the Jews to Rome in 54 new conflict arose between the Gentile Christians and the Jewish Christians who had formerly been expelled.[22] Keck thinks Gentile Christians may have developed a dislike of or looked down on Jews (see also Antisemitism and Responsibility for the death of Jesus), because they theologically rationalized that Jews were no longer God's people.[23]

text: Style[edit]

text: Scholars often have difficulty assessing whether Romans is a letter or an epistle, a relevant distinction in form-critical analysis:

text: A letter is something non-literary, a means of communication between persons who are separated from each other. Confidential and personal in nature, it is intended only for the person or persons to whom it is addressed, and not at all for the public or any kind of publicity...An Epistle is an artistic literary form, just like the dialogue, the oration, or the drama. It has nothing in common with the letter except its form: apart from that one might venture the paradox that the epistle is the opposite of a real letter. The contents of the epistle are intended for publicity—they aim at interesting "the public."[24]

text: Joseph Fitzmyer argues, from evidence put forth by Stirewalt, that the style of Romans is an "essay-letter."[25] Philip Melanchthon, a writer during the Reformation, suggested that Romans was caput et summa universae doctrinae christianae ("a summary of all Christian doctrine").[26] While some scholars attempt to suggest, like Melanchthon, that it is a type of theological treatise, this view largely ignores chapters 14 and 15 of Romans. There are also many "noteworthy elements" missing from Romans that are included in other areas of the Pauline corpus.[27] The breakdown of Romans as a treatise began with F.C. Baur in 1836 when he suggested "this letter had to be interpreted according to the historical circumstances in which Paul wrote it."[26]

text: Paul sometimes uses a style of writing common in his time called a "diatribe". He appears to be responding to a "heckler" (probably an imaginary one based on Paul's encounters with real objections in his previous preaching), and the letter is structured as a series of arguments. In the flow of the letter, Paul shifts his arguments, sometimes addressing the Jewish members of the church, sometimes the Gentile membership and sometimes the church as a whole.[citation needed]

text: Purposes of writing[edit]

text: To review the current scholarly viewpoints on the purpose of Romans, along with a bibliography, see Dictionary of Paul and His Letters.[28] For a 16th-century "Lollard" reformer view, see the work of William Tyndale. In his prologue to his translation of the book of Romans, which was largely taken from the prologue of German Reformer Martin Luther, Tyndale writes that:

text: ... this epistle is the principal and most excellent part of the new testament, and most pure evangelion, that is to say glad tidings and what we call the gospel, and also a light and a way in unto the whole scripture ... The sum and whole cause of the writings of this epistle, is, to prove that a man is justified by faith only: which proposition whoso denieth, to him is not only this epistle and all that Paul writeth, but also the whole scripture, so locked up that he shall never understand it to his soul's health. And to bring a man to the understanding and feeling that faith only justifieth, Paul proveth that the whole nature of man is so poisoned and so corrupt, yea and so dead concerning godly living or godly thinking, that it is impossible for her to keep the law in the sight of God.[29]

text: Contents[edit]

text: This essay-letter composed by Paul was written to a specific audience at a specific time; to understand it, the situations of both Paul and the recipients must be understood.

text: Prologue (1:1–15)[edit]

text: Greeting (1:1–7)[edit]

text: The introduction[Rom 1:1–16] provides some general notes about Paul. He introduces his apostleship here and introductory notes about the gospel he wishes to preach to the church at Rome. Jesus' human line stems from David.[1:3] Paul, however, does not limit his ministry to Jews. Paul's goal is that the Gentiles would also hear the gospel.[1:5]

text: Prayer of Thanksgiving (1:8–15)[edit]

text: He commends the Romans for their faith.[1:8] Paul also speaks of the past obstacles that have blocked his coming to Rome earlier.[1:11–13]

text: Salvation in the Christ (1:16 –8:39)[edit]

text: Righteousness of God (1:16–17)[edit]

text: Paul's announcement that he is not "ashamed" (epaiscúnomai) of his gospel because it holds power (dúnamis). These two verses form a backdrop for the rest of the book. First, we note that Paul is unashamed of his love for this gospel that he preaches about Jesus Christ. He also notes that he is speaking to the "Jew first."[1:16] There is significance to this, but much of it is scholarly conjecture as the relationship of Paul the Apostle and Judaism is still debated. We are hard-pressed to find an answer to such a question without knowing more about the audience in question. Wayne Brindle argues, based on Paul's former writings against the Judaizers in Galatians and 2 Corinthians, that rumors had probably spread about Paul totally negating the Jewish existence in a Christian world (see also Antinomianism in the New Testament and Supersessionism). Paul may have used the "Jew first" approach to counter such a view.[30]

text: Condemnation: The Universal corruption of Gentiles and Jews (1:18 –3:20)[edit]

text: The judgment of God (1:18–32)[edit]

text: Paul now begins into the main thrust of his letter. He begins by suggesting that humans have taken up ungodliness and wickedness for which there will be wrath from God.[1:18] People have taken God's invisible image and made him into an idol. Paul draws heavily here from the Wisdom of Solomon.[31] He condemns unnatural sexual behavior and warns that such behavior will result in a depraved body and mind ("reprobate mind" in the King James Version) [1:26–27] and says that people who do such things (including murder and wickedness [1:29]) are worthy of death.[1:32] Paul stands firmly against the idol worship system which was common in Rome. Several scholars believe the passage is a non-Pauline interpolation.[32]

text: Paul's warning of hypocrites (2:1–4)[edit]

text: On the traditional Protestant interpretation, Paul here calls out Jews who are condemning others for not following the law when they themselves are also not following the law. Stanley Stowers, however, has argued on rhetorical grounds that Paul is in these verses not addressing a Jew at all but rather an easily recognizable caricature of the typical boastful person (ὁ ἀλαζων). Stowers writes, "There is absolutely no justification for reading 2:1–5 as Paul's attack on 'the hypocrisy of the Jew.' No one in the first century would have identified ho alazon with Judaism. That popular interpretation depends upon anachronistically reading later Christian characterizations of Jews as 'hypocritical Pharisees'".[33] See also Anti-Judaism.

text: Justification: The Gift of Grace and Forgiveness through Faith (3:21 –5:11)[edit]

text: Paul says that a righteousness from God has made itself known apart from the law, to which the law and prophets testify, and this righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus to all who believe.[3:21–22] He describes justification – legally clearing the believer of the guilt and penalty of sin – as a gift of God,[3:24] and not the work of man (lest he might boast), but by faith.[3:28]

text: Assurance of salvation (5 –11)[edit]

text: In chapters five through eight, Paul argues that believers can be assured of their hope in salvation, having been freed from the bondage of sin. Paul teaches that through faith,[3:28] [4:3] the faithful have been joined with Jesus[5:1] and freed from sin.[6:1–2] [6:18] Believers should celebrate in the assurance of salvation[12:12] and be certain that no external force or party can take their salvation away from them[8:38-39].[34] This promise is open to everyone since everyone has sinned,[3:23] save the one who paid for all of them.[3:24]

text: In chapters 9–11 Paul addresses the faithfulness of God to the Israelites, where he says that God has been faithful to His promise. Paul hopes that all Israelites will come to realize the truth[9:1–5] since he himself was also an Israelite,[11:1] and had in the past been a persecutor of Early Christians. In Romans 9–11 Paul talks about how the nation of Israel has been cast away, and the conditions under which Israel will be God's chosen nation again: when Israel returns to its faith, sets aside its unbelief.[11:19–24]

text: In Romans 7:1, Paul says that humans are under the law while we live: "Know ye not...that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?" However, Jesus' death on the cross makes believers dead to the law (7:4, "Wherefore, my brethren, ye are also become dead to the law by the body of Christ"), according to an antinomistic interpretation.

text: Transformation of believers (12 –15:13)[edit]

text: From chapter 12 through the first part of chapter 15, Paul outlines how the Gospel transforms believers and the behaviour that results from such a transformation. This transformation is described as a "renewing of your mind" (12:2),[35] a transformation that Douglas J. Moo characterizes as “the heart of the matter.”[36] It is a transformation so radical that it amounts to “a transfiguration of your brain,” a "metanoia", a “mental revolution.”[37]

text: Paul goes on to describe how believers should live. Christians are no longer under the law, that is, no longer bound by the law of Moses,[38] but under the grace of God, see Law and grace. We do not need to live under the law because to the extent our minds have been renewed, we will know "almost instinctively" what God wants of us. The law then provides an "objective standard" for judging progress in the "lifelong process" of our mind's renewal.[39]

text: To the extent they have been set free from sin by renewed minds (Romans 6:18),[40] believers are no longer bound to sin. Believers are free to live in obedience to God and love everybody. As Paul says in Romans 13:10, "love (ἀγάπη) worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of law".[41]

text: Obedience to earthly powers (13:1–7)[edit]

text: The fragment in Romans 13:1–7 dealing with obedience to earthly powers is considered by some, for example James Kallas,[42] to be an interpolation.[43] (See also the Great Commandment and Christianity and politics). Paul Tillich accepts the historical authenticity of Romans 13:1–7, but claims it has been misinterpreted by churches with an anti-revolutionary bias:

text: One of the many politico-theological abuses of biblical statements is the understanding of Paul’s words [Romans 13:1–7] as justifying the anti-revolutionary bias of some churches, particularly the Lutheran. But neither these words nor any other New Testament statement deals with the methods of gaining political power. In Romans, Paul is addressing eschatological enthusiasts, not a revolutionary political movement.[44]

text: Epilogue (15:1 –16:23)[edit]

text:
Admonition (15:1–7)
Summary of the Epistle (15:8)

text: Paul's ministry and travel plans (16:14–27)[edit]

text: The concluding verses contain a description of his travel plans, personal greetings and salutations. One-third of the twenty-one Christians identified in the greetings are women, some of whom played an important role in the early church at Rome. Additionally, none of these Christians answer to the name Peter, although according to the Catholic tradition, he had been ruling as Pope in Rome for about 25 years. Possibly related was the Incident at Antioch between Paul and Cephas.

text:
Personal greetings (16:1–23 [24])
Closing doxology (16:25–27)

text: Hermeneutics[edit]

text: Catholic interpretation[edit]

text: Catholics accept the necessity of faith for salvation but point to Romans 2:5–11 for the necessity of living a virtuous life as well:[45]

text: But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality.

text: Throughout his writings, St. Augustine strongly affirms the Catholic understanding of this and other such Scriptural admonitions. In his sermons to his Catholic congregations, he is especially careful to warn them against an inordinate desire for a complete assurance of salvation. In his Exposition of Psalm 147 for example, he states:[46]

text: The gospel warned us, "Be on the watch for the last day, the day when the Son of Man will come," because it will spell disaster for those it finds secure as they are now – secure for the wrong reasons, I mean, secure in the pleasures of this world, when they ought to be secure only when they have dominated this world's lusts. The apostle certainly prepares us for that future life in words of which I also reminded you on that occasion.

text: Again, in his Exposition of Psalm 85, Augustine is perhaps even more specific:[47]

text: Let us not expect security while we are on pilgrimage. When we do find ourselves wanting it, what we are looking for is bodily sluggishness rather than personal security.

text: Catholics would also look to the passage in Romans 8:13 for evidence that justification by faith is only valid so long as it is combined with obedient cooperation with The Holy Spirit, and the passage in Romans 11:22 to show that the Christian can lose their justification if they turn away from cooperating with The Holy Spirit and reject Christ through mortal sin.

text: Protestant interpretation[edit]

text: In the Protestant interpretation, the New Testament epistles (including Romans), describes salvation as coming from faith and not from righteous actions. For example, Romans 4:2–5 (underlining added):

text: They also point out that in Romans chapter 2:9, Paul says that God will reward those who follow the law and then goes on to say that no one follows the law perfectly (see also Sermon on the Mount: Interpretation) Romans 2:21–25:

text: Martin Luther described Paul's letter to the Romans as "the most important piece in the New Testament. It is purest Gospel. It is well worth a Christian's while not only to memorize it word for word but also to occupy himself with it daily, as though it were the daily bread of the soul".[48]

text: Luther controversially added the word "alone" (allein in German) to Romans 3:28 so that it read: "thus, we hold, then, that man is justified without doing the works of the law, alone through faith".[49] The word "alone" does not appear in the original Greek text,[50] but Luther defended his translation by maintaining that the adverb "alone" was required both by idiomatic German and Paul's intended meaning. This is a "literalist view" rather than an literal view of the Bible.[51]

text: Apologist James Swan lists numerous Catholic sources that also translated Romans 3:28 with the word "alone," or testified to others doing so before Luther.[52] A Bible commentary published in 1864 reports that:

text: Catholic translators before the time of Luther had given the same translation. So in the Nuremberg Bible, 1483, "Nur durch den glauben." And the Italian Bibles of Geneva, 1476, and of Venice, 1538, per sola fede. The Fathers also often use the expression, "man is justified by faith alone;" [53]

text: The Romans Road (or Roman Road) refers to a set of scriptures from Romans that Christian evangelists use to present a clear and simple case for personal salvation to each person, as all the verses are contained in one single book, making it easier for evangelism without going back and forth through the entire New Testament. The core verses used by nearly all groups using Romans Road are: Romans 3:23, 6:23, 5:8, 10:9, and 10:13.[54]

text: Romans has been at the forefront of several major movements in Protestantism. Martin Luther's lectures on Romans in 1515–1516 probably coincided with the development of his criticism of Roman Catholicism which led to the 95 Theses of 1517. In 1738, while hearing Luther's Preface to the Epistle to the Romans read at St. Botolph Church on Aldersgate Street in London, John Wesley famously felt his heart "strangely warmed", a conversion experience which is often seen as the beginning of Methodism. In 1919 Karl Barth's commentary on Romans, The Epistle to the Romans, was the publication which is widely seen as the beginning of neo-orthodoxy.[citation needed]