Changes

Should be 'people', not 'men': the issue is faithfulness to the original text.

Should be 'people', not 'men': the issue is faithfulness to the original text.

Copies from Conservative Bible Project talk page:

Copied from Conservative Bible Project talk page:

The Greek texts for this verse are completely consistent, barring diacritical marks: 'καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, δεῦτε ὀπίσω μου, καὶ ποιήσω ὑμᾶς ἁλεεῖς ἀνθρώπων' (Tischendorf text). Details here. άνθρωπος is translated as 'human being' by Wharton, Etyma Graeca: an Etymological Lexicon of Classical Greek and by Powell, Lexicon to Herodotus:. In Modern Greek, άνθρωπος normally means 'person' (gender-neutral) but is also a slang term for a man, equivalent to 'bloke' or 'guy'.

The Greek texts for this verse are completely consistent, barring diacritical marks: 'καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, δεῦτε ὀπίσω μου, καὶ ποιήσω ὑμᾶς ἁλεεῖς ἀνθρώπων' (Tischendorf text). [http://scripturetext.com/matthew/4-19 Details here]. άνθρωπος is translated as 'human being' by [http://www.archive.org/stream/etymagraecaetymo00wharuoft#page/26/mode/2up Wharton, Etyma Graeca: an Etymological Lexicon of Classical Greek] and by [http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=genpub;cc=genpub;rgn=full%20text;idno=afe7756.0001.001;didno=AFE7756.0001.001;view=image;seq=44;page=root;size=s;frm=frameset; Powell, Lexicon to Herodotus:]. In Modern Greek, άνθρωπος normally means 'person' (gender-neutral) but is also a slang term for a man, equivalent to 'bloke' or 'guy'.

In Tyndale's time (early 16th century), 'men' was a gender-neutral word to refer to people, male and female. This was already becoming archaic by the time of the KJV (much of the language in the KJV was old-fashioned partly because that seems to have been a prestigious writing style and partly because it relied very heavily on Tyndale's work). In any case, 'fishers of people' is a more accurate translation into modern English than 'fishers of men' and the notion that 'people' might sound politically-correct and gender-neutral to those familiar with the KJV is neither here not there. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 20:01, 13 November 2009 (EST)

In Tyndale's time (early 16th century), 'men' was a gender-neutral word to refer to people, male and female. This was already becoming archaic by the time of the KJV (much of the language in the KJV was old-fashioned partly because that seems to have been a prestigious writing style and partly because it relied very heavily on Tyndale's work). In any case, 'fishers of people' is a more accurate translation into modern English than 'fishers of men' and the notion that 'people' might sound politically-correct and gender-neutral to those familiar with the KJV is neither here not there. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 20:01, 13 November 2009 (EST)

: A mere three minutes between commenting and changing is obviously not long enough.  Moreover, your comment does not respond to mine:  the "fishers of ____" is a masculine analogy akin to a football analogy today.  The person must be masculine to fit the metaphor.  Moreover, the Greek word is typically translated as "man" or "men", not as "people".--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:17, 13 November 2009 (EST)

: A mere three minutes between commenting and changing is obviously not long enough.  Moreover, your comment does not respond to mine:  the "fishers of ____" is a masculine analogy akin to a football analogy today.  The person must be masculine to fit the metaphor.  Moreover, the Greek word is typically translated as "man" or "men", not as "people".--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:17, 13 November 2009 (EST)