389
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 109:
Line 109: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Luke 17-24 (Translated) (view source)
Revision as of 16:35, January 28, 2010
, 16:35, January 28, 2010→Chapter 20 revisions
:::::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 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)
:::::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)
===Recap of question regarding 20:9-18===
Jacob believes that the addition of the concept of unionized workers into the parable adds to the translation because:
:*These farmers organized to conspire against their employer, which he sees as a trait of unions
:*Demanded greater privileges than their work entitled them to, which he sees as a trait of unions
:*Killed those they disagreed with, which he sees as a trait of unions
:*While unions are a modern concept, the use of such modern concepts is appropriate in this project where they help express the original intent better than the archaic language could.
I believe that the insertion of the concept of these farmers being unionized is incorrect here because:
:*This project's mission is to remove liberal bias from the translation, not to insert new messages that didn't already exist, even if we agree with the message itself.
:*Unions didn't exist then, and since the original text refers to a bunch of rebel farmers that is all that is needed in the translation - there is nothing unclear about this scenario
:*This parable was meant to be a metaphor for men acting against their master's (God's) will, and focusing instead on how disobedient men organized themselves dilutes that message
:*A group of men plotting to do wrong together is a conspiracy, not necessarily a union. This is adding controversy and inviting criticism, which distracts readers from Jesus' message here
:*Verse 16 highlights the problem - if the punishment for theft, assault and murder is simply the busting of a union and not the punishment of the men at fault, Jesus' message is lost
Jacob's edits are now the current version, and I have agreed not to revert them myself. However, I am requesting that others involved in this project read through the comments above and the verses in question, and provide guidance as to whether the inserted union references should be retained or removed. Thanks. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 11:35, 28 January 2010 (EST)