(no subject)
Mar. 21st, 2003 11:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sophiaserpentiaJust posted this in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
jesusliberation, but wanted to post it here for posterity.
There seems to be an unending debate in progressive and liberal religious circles over whether to use male, female, or non-gendered names when refering to God.
In a conversation going on in another forum, it was suggested that we should follow the example Jesus set, which was to use masculine terms of familiarity like "Daddy."
In my opinion, what was most distinctive about the way Jesus spoke about God was that it was designed to shock its listeners out of complacency regarding their conceptions and visualizations of God. Addressing God with the familiar term "Daddy" was, in its day, a far break from the various formal names of God used by Jewish mystics of that day (many of which have been enshrined in the Kabbalah).
If so, then we defy the point Jesus tried to make if we stick too closely to his way of addressing God. I personally prefer to replace "Father" with "Root of All," but I wonder what other terms or addresses we might use.
jesusliberation, but wanted to post it here for posterity.There seems to be an unending debate in progressive and liberal religious circles over whether to use male, female, or non-gendered names when refering to God.
In a conversation going on in another forum, it was suggested that we should follow the example Jesus set, which was to use masculine terms of familiarity like "Daddy."
In my opinion, what was most distinctive about the way Jesus spoke about God was that it was designed to shock its listeners out of complacency regarding their conceptions and visualizations of God. Addressing God with the familiar term "Daddy" was, in its day, a far break from the various formal names of God used by Jewish mystics of that day (many of which have been enshrined in the Kabbalah).
If so, then we defy the point Jesus tried to make if we stick too closely to his way of addressing God. I personally prefer to replace "Father" with "Root of All," but I wonder what other terms or addresses we might use.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-03-21 11:30 am (UTC)And it's sweet of you to offer to give me credit, but that does seem to be defeating the purpose... the intention when talking about God-concepts is really that it's from yourself. To see labels as possessions rather than just means of communication... well, I'm not sure about that whole dynamic or where I fit into it. Besides, I borrowed the term from another source, although my reasons for using it are personal to me and may differ from the reasons of the people I adopted it from.
Vulgar shmulgar... one man's vulgar is another man's expression of a beautiful gift. Or woman's, for that matter. Maybe I should care more about people getting offended. But I can't stop them.