What the early church thought about God's gender
From the article:
To read more:
https://religionnews.com/2018/08/02/what-the-early-church-thought-about-gods-gender/
Attempts to debate the gender of the Creator are, in my view, mainly an attempt at anthropomorphizing the Creator in an attempt at understanding the Creator.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I'm going back to the origin story, which was recorded in writing long, long before that supposed quote.
It's all part of the same religion, you know. Which parts are wrong, guilliameb? Which parts are true?
You never seem willing to say what you think about that.
Is any of it actually true? I don't think you've answered that question, either.
Of course humans anthropomorphize. There's really no alternative. That has nothing to do with what is true and what is not.
... at least if you assume the use of "man" vs "human" in translation came from patriarchal reflections in language construction.
Then again my poor Grandmother had to just finally say "Not all of the Bible is meant literally" after she took on the onerous task (and multi-generation family tradition due to a Catholic/Protestant marriage) of home Bible study instead of church attendance. It was sometime about when I was asking her about why there was a distinct contradiction between Gen 1 and 2, and the insane number of years people allegedly lived then. 
My view is that the human mind has to label and box and categorize everything -- our wetware needs to box in a concept to understand it. But even the box we've made for "infinity" is pretty iffy. It's got a label, but we can't comprehend what we've put inside it. It takes macro- and microcosmic views of the universe from elementary particles to the observable universe to really start putting info in the box we call "life, the universe, and everything", and even then it's usually the series of logarithmic slideshow images that get filed. It about maxes out our processor, but trying to unbox and understand infinity creates a divide by zero.
And so does trying to box something defined by the concepts of "infinity" and "eternal" and "omnipresent".
Poor Granny.
Then again, the morning Jesus was arrested, they found him with a nude young boy. So for all we know the rape of children is as biblical as it gets.
The author of the article you posted didn't originate this same idea as it's been around for a long time. One thing the article fails to mention is this interpretation of Exodus 3:14 is far from a consensus view among biblical scholars. Furthermore it originated in oral tradition for centuries and nobody knows for sure how the original Hebrew words would have been pronounced and translation errors are all but assured.
The very best part of this mental masturbation exercise is you are actually trying to make sense out of what a mythological talking plant said.
cheeky post. 🙂
'Some o' them people.'
These pervert the intent of the 'message', if you will.
You do have the understanding that there are many/enough believers that are righteously incensed regarding shall we say 'charlatans' that have literally ruined the Christian faith/message.
& 😍
and all those other people are doing it wrong. Even so, there are an awful lot of those other people, and the actions they take based on their interpretation of Christianity negatively affect us all.
It'll have that clinical effect on a body.
Dispassionate.
These two knew better and deliberately lied in keeping a portion of their pledged offering for themselves. The apostles didn't 'kill' them. If the story is literally received, they keeled over themselves/croaked themselves by their foolish submission to the lying wiles of the enemy.
There are modern day stories regarding 'men of the cloth' who were supernaturally affected trying to serve a church service. In a not good way.
Years ago, I witnessed a 'sign' during one Feastday of the Resurrection service. It had to do with the Paschal candle. 'Some' would pooh-pooh it with a 'reasonable' explanation.
One can grieve the Holy Spirit, lie to the Holy Spirit, employ deception in relations with the Holy Spirit, resist the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Which may to a lesser degree be committed today. But who knows.
cheeky post. 🙂
'Some o' them people.'
Just sayin' 
Just sayin'
I was taught that God had no gender. When I asked in Confirmation, why we didn't have a special pronoun for God, the pastor didn't have an answer. Then I said, "There's God the Father & God the Son & God the Holy Ghost. Where are the women in this religion?" The pastor then started naming all the female characters in the Bible, like I wasn't smart enough to discern the difference between a female human & a female deity. 
It was one of my first feminist experiences & it turned me off of religion ever since.
After a few millennia or so of being passed around from countless generations of superstitious illiterates it was eventually written down, lost, and re-scribed dog knows how many times. During this span of several thousand years the language changed dramatically and thousands of translation errors introduced at every step of the process.
Yet some would have you believe they can derive subtle linguistic original meanings from all this, even though it completely contradicts everything else we have about how those original people interpreted it. 
Meanwhile all of this betrays a far simpler and far more reasonable explanation, which is man created god in his own image.
