|
my point on arguing was when I read what was said, it seemed to me to be subltle attempt to bait people into commenting on it (which worked). The gender of god (or lack thereof) had nothing to do with the conversation at hand and that comment seemed to be added with the sole intent of baiting people into the conversation. Assigning a gender to god is pretty silly in itself because it suggests god is part of procreation and that there is a counterpart to god that he can procreate with. He is mearly the normal pronoun to use when refering to god and it doesn't imply gender. It doesn't work as a pronoun because it implys a non-living object and Christianity is about a living God. I stand by my statement that he used the pronoun she only to strike an argument if you wish to use a euphamism and call it "discussion" or "thinking about it" go ahead and do it but that wording was clearly chosen for a reason.
|