Automoderated users, edit
3,552
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 97:
Line 97: − + − + − + − + − + − + + + + + + +
Talk:Luke 17-24 (Translated) (view source)
Revision as of 21:13, January 27, 2010
, 21:13, January 27, 2010→Chapter 20 revisions
I removed the references to unions and union-busting in this chapter, because the original simply mentioned "farmers". This was a very powerful, direct parable about men charged with doing the will of their master rejecting the master's will, and harming those sent to remind them of the master's will, including killing the master's son. This is too important a metaphor for what is happening between Jesus and those rejecting him to try and turn it into an anti-union statement, especially since unions as we understand them did not exist then. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 09:50, 27 January 2010 (EST)
I removed the references to unions and union-busting in this chapter, because the original simply mentioned "farmers". This was a very powerful, direct parable about men charged with doing the will of their master rejecting the master's will, and harming those sent to remind them of the master's will, including killing the master's son. This is too important a metaphor for what is happening between Jesus and those rejecting him to try and turn it into an anti-union statement, especially since unions as we understand them did not exist then. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 09:50, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:Jesus didn't constrain himself by only talking about things which existed during his own time. He discussed the destruction of the temple, which didn't occur for 40 years after his death, the persecution of Christians, which didn't REALLY get underway for maybe 80-100 years after his death, and yes, even unions.
:English allows descriptions far more accurate than were available in the Greek; please don't remove descriptions of these farmers which are clearly true from the context. If you wish to alter another editors translation, bring it up on a talk page first. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:27, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:If you want to deny that the farmers in the parable are uniting to extort their employer, go ahead, but I'm not in favor of censorship like you are.
:::I'm sorry. Usually I keep these edits to basic spelling and grammar, but in this case the insertion of the concept of unionized workers has no basis, and doesn't leave the meaning of the story intact - it distorts it. Let's discuss this on the Talk page. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 15:43, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:::::''People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion,''
::::It absolutely has a basis. The text is clear: a group of workers organized to conspire against their employer, demand greater pirveleges than their work entitled them to, and [[Jimmy Hoffa|killed those they disagreed with.]] Sound familiar? Just because the word union didn't exist in Greek, doesn't mean we shouldn't use it now when it's clear that that is what is meant.
:::::''but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.''
::::Jesus didn't constrain himself by only talking about things which existed during his own time. He discussed the destruction of the temple, which didn't occur for 40 years after his death, the persecution of Christians, which didn't REALLY get underway for maybe 80-100 years after his death, and yes, even unions.
:::::::::::::::::::::- Adam Smith
::::If you want to deny that the farmers in the parable are uniting to extort their employer, go ahead, but I'm not in favor of censorship like you are.
:[[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 16:09, 27 January 2010 (EST)
::::::::''People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion,''
::::::::''but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.''
::::::::::::::::::::::::- Adam Smith
::::[[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 16:09, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:::::Jacob, there's an obvious difference between a group of bad people who conspire together to commit a crime and people who unionize. I'm not a fan of unions - aside from their work-place safety priorities that could have been addressed by legislation, they have not accomplished anything positive for the economy and frankly destroyed the American auto industry. Using your analogy, we could describe the farm as being taken over by an organized-crime gang and it would be as appropriate in terms of modern language, and probably moreso.
:::::The simple fact is that unionized labor did not exist back then, and describing these farmers as being members of a union that needs to be "busted" in verse 16 is not replacing archaic language with better modern terms, it's adding a distinction that didn't even exist and detracts from the meaning of the story. The farmers were thieves and murderers, and they themselves deserved punishment.
:::::The men were farmers in the original version, and referring to them as "farmers" rather than as "the union" in the Conservative translation takes away nothing. It fulfills the original intent. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 16:08, 27 January 2010 (EST)