News 2023 EPCOT International Festival of the Holidays

[jmvd20]

"Goodwill towards men" was widely accepted for millennia to mean women as well, the same way that "mankind" doesn't just refer to all the men on Earth. That is why literally nobody had a problem with it until new genders started being made up in the 21st century, causing this expression, after having been OK for thousands of years, to somehow be considered verboten.

But I suspect you already knew that.

For several thousand years we thought the sun orbited the Earth, just because we "thought" this or "accepted" that doesn't make it right.

But I suspect you already knew that...

 

[Brian]

For several thousand years we thought the sun orbited the Earth, just because we "thought" this or "accepted" that doesn't make it right.

You're conflating two distinct matters.

Language, such as "mankind" referring to all humans, is subjective. There is no 'truth' in language beyond what has been considered consensus among the population, and as developed over time.

Science, on the other hand, remains steadfast and is objective. The Earth has always orbited around the sun, and it always will. Even back when our ancestors believed it to be the other way around, it didn't alter the facts.

 

[jmvd20]

You just proved my point, it is subjective just as the interpretation of the Bible is subjective. Humankind is the appropriate word to describe all of us, not mankind. That is my subjective opinion and thus I hold to my original statement of applauding goodwill to all vs goodwill to men. After all, according to thousands of years of “consensus” men also includes women therefore men means “all”.

There shouldn’t be anything “abhorrent” using that translation.

 

[MisterPenguin]

You just proved my point, it is subjective just as the interpretation of the Bible is subjective. Humankind is the appropriate word to describe all of us, not mankind. That is my subjective opinion and thus I hold to my original statement of applauding goodwill to all vs goodwill to men. After all, according to thousands of years of “consensus” men also includes women therefore men means “all”.

There shouldn’t be anything “abhorrent” using that translation.

No it has not been happening for millenia. Latin and Greek used the word for human beings when they meant human beings not the word for men.

 

[castlecake2.0]

Then why not change it to "and on earth, peace to people of goodwill?" Sure, it's not the most eloquent, by modern standards at least, but many of the other quotes in the show also adopt similar "strange" (again, by modern standards) wording.

Because it’s an entertainment offering in a theme park owned by a giant mouse, not a church service

 

[JohnD]

Because it’s an entertainment offering in a theme park owned by a giant mouse, not a church service

While I'm not upset by the changing of "men" to "all"--it's a variation of the 1611 King James Version which used "men" when referring to everyone--the context of the Scripture passage is still the same. So, sure it's a theme park offering, but if they're offering the story of Jesus, it better be right and not change the context of Biblical Scripture to something it's not.

 

[mikejs78]

I'm not necessarily opposed to changing it from "men" to something which can be more easily understood to include women as well, I'd have just preferred they take a widely-accepted translation and run with it instead of (seemingly) coming up with their own.

I'm Jewish, so needless to say, I'm not an expert on the New Testament. If there is a widely-accepted translation from which they derived the script change, I'd love to be wrong.

But that's just it - there isn't a "widely-accepted" translation of the bible. There are over 100 English translations of the bible, and all take a different approach to translation, because translation is an art as much as a science, as 1:1 translations are often meaningless. The explosion in translations coincides with the biblical scholorship and discoveries of ancient texts over the past century.

For example, the original traditional Greek of the text in question is literally translated as "peace to men of good pleasure". There's even some disagreement on what is the original text, because there are two slightly different texts for that verse among early manuscripts.

It's very possible that Disney simply picked up a translation that has the wording the way they said it. I don't think it's anything nefarious around here.

 

[Brian]

But that's just it - there isn't a "widely-accepted" translation of the bible. There are over 100 English translations of the bible, and all take a different approach to translation, because translation is an art as much as a science, as 1:1 translations are often meaningless. The explosion in translations coincides with the biblical scholorship and discoveries of ancient texts over the past century.

For example, the original traditional Greek of the text in question is literally translated as "peace to men of good pleasure". There's even some disagreement on what is the original text, because there are two slightly different texts for that verse among early manuscripts.

It's very possible that Disney simply picked up a translation that has the wording the way they said it. I don't think it's anything nefarious around here.

By a "widely accepted" translation, I was meaning to exclude fringe translations used in small pockets of the Christian faith.

Certainly there are many translations used by large swaths of the Christian world, and any of them would be fair game for Disney to derive the script from. I'm just not confident they did. The narration for that part only had one word change. If they adopted a new translation, it's likely not just going to change one word in that part.

 

[JohnD]

By a "widely accepted" translation, I was meaning to exclude fringe translations used in small pockets of the Christian.

Certainly there are many translations used by large swaths of the Christian world, and any of them would be fair game for Disney to derive the script from. I'm just not confident they did. The narration for that part only had one word change. If they adopted a new translation, it's likely not just going to change one word in that part.

I don't expect Disney to use any specific translation. Because of the nature of the production, they're using a script, not reading a translation of the Bible. Just stay correct within the parameters of the story of the birth of Jesus as told in the Bible, understanding that even Bible translations will vary.

 

[Disstevefan1]

No one ever seems to mention the "Lights of Winter" display that used to be at Epcot every year. Not sure why they stopped doing this.

I loved this. I saw this from the front of the monorail, both impossible now.

I remember when Disney decided to stop this, they actually said they did not have the technology to continue it, LOL, an obvious lie. I laughed at that. Its sad we not longer have beautiful things like this.

 

[peter11435]

I loved this. I saw this from the front of the monorail, both impossible now.

I remember when Disney decided to stop this, they actually said they did not have the technology to continue it, LOL, an obvious lie. I laughed at that. Its sad we not longer have beautiful things like this.

That’s not what they said. They said the technology had become obsolete. It was removed at the time when all of their holiday decor packages were being transitioned from incandescent to LED. The initiative had the goal of switching to 100% LED lighting. They chose not to spend the money to upgrade the lights of winter.

 

[Disstevefan1]

That’s not what they said. They said the technology had become obsolete. It was removed at the time when all of their holiday decor packages were being transitioned from incandescent to LED. The initiative had the goal of switching to 100% LED lighting. They chose not to spend the money to upgrade the lights of winter.

Thanks for clarifying this.

Sill a poor excuse and technically is still a lie. Obsolete to Disney means they don't want to spend the money to update from incandescent to LED, after all, the lights of winter were only for guests enjoyment they cant make money from it so they got rid of it.

Another Bad Show from Disney.

 

[peter11435]

Thanks for clarifying this.

Sill a poor excuse and technically is still a lie. Obsolete to Disney means they don't want to spend the money to update from incandescent to LED, after all, the lights of winter were only for guests enjoyment they cant make money from it so they got rid of it.

Another Bad Show from Disney.

I agree it was a poor excuse and a mistake. Although I wouldn’t exactly consider it a lie. The incandescent bulbs used in the display and its controllers were obsolete. They just could have and should have upgraded the display or created a worthy replacement.

 

[fgmnt]

There are many translations used by different denominations. Some translations just grant good will toward "those with whom God is pleased".

Personally, I refuse to participate or recognize in any biblical readings that are not in the original Greek.

 

[jmvd20]

Pretty much settled, keep the Bible and religion out of any theme park. Leave it for church time.

 

[Touchdown]

So, cancel Christmas celebrations at theme parks? Christmas is a religious holiday, you can’t celebrate it without its first syllable, it’s literally in the name. I won’t criticize a park that chooses to do that, but I will criticize any park that doesn’t at least acknowledge the religious aspect in one of their offerings if they have a Christmas festival. It makes the celebration ring hollow.

 

[MisterPenguin]

By a "widely accepted" translation, I was meaning to exclude fringe translations used in small pockets of the Christian faith that were invented by DEI activists at Harvard, for example.

And the scholars that King James gathered knew more of ancient languages than modern scholars? LOL.

New International Version (used mostly by Evangelicals)
“Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

New Revised Standard Version, Anglicized Version
‘Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favours!’

New Catholic Bible (also used in Catholic liturgy)
“Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to all those on whom his favor rests.”

So, the revised King James version, the bible that Evangelicals use, and the one used by Catholics (which are half of all Christians), all eschew Old English exclusive language, since the original is "anthropos," which means people/human.

Greek had a work for "man," it is andros. As in "androgen," a male hormone.

This is why the study of human beings is called "anthropology" and not "andrology."

And moving from the "used for millenia" argument to "you can't just change one word from a quote!" is the very definition of "moving the goalposts."

Oh, BTW, the Candlelight script doesn't use the King James Version for its script.

Pretty much settled, keep the Bible and religion out of any theme park. Leave it for church time.

The Candlelight Procession is what Walt wanted. Take it up with him.

 

[castlecake2.0]

I agree it was a poor excuse and a mistake. Although I wouldn’t exactly consider it a lie. The incandescent bulbs used in the display and its controllers were obsolete. They just could have and should have upgraded the display or created a worthy replacement.

Pretty sure the “replacement” was how we ended up with Joyful!

 

[Tuvalu]

Pretty much settled, keep the Bible and religion out of any theme park. Leave it for church time.

Dollywood would like a word.

 

[SaucyBoy]

I will criticize any park that doesn’t at least acknowledge the religious aspect in one of their offerings if they have a Christmas festival.

Fortunately Epcot isn't one of those parks