Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site deepthot.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!psddevl!deepthot!julian
From: julian@deepthot.UUCP (Julian Davies)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.women
Subject: Re: Deific gender question
Message-ID: <362@deepthot.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-Aug-84 16:55:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: deepthot.362
Posted: Mon Aug 20 16:55:10 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 21-Aug-84 01:49:44 EDT
References: <364@tellab1.UUCP>
Organization: UWO CS, London Canada
Lines: 9

I was in a discussion last week on the subject of "non-inclusive
language".  The question of gender for God arose.  One person
remarked that the concept of God as "Father" was very meaningful
in terms of its associations, even though she generaly objects to
non-inclusive language being used.  Our feelings don't always match
our thinking.   Other remark made was that *many* people nowadays are
growing up in single-parent families in which they have no exposure to
a "father" figure--maybe the language will not speak to them.
		Julian Davies