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