On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:19:39PM -0400, Celejar wrote: > On Fri, 11 May 2007 13:26:34 +0200 > Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Roberto � wrote: > > > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Joe Hart wrote: > > >> My point is that God, if She exists, is beyond our comprehension. We > > >> have to have faith in Her existence. > > >> > > > A valid point, except that God is in fact a He. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > -Roberto > > > > > > > Now it is you that missed my point. I am saying that nobody really > > *knows* what God is. I am sure there are many females that would > > disagree with you on this point. Personally, I would better define God > > at as It. > > > > Let us just agree that to you, God is a He. > > In the mainstream, traditional Western religions, God is described as > He. Anyone can believe anything he (or she) wants, but if females > choose to believe that God is a she just because that suits their > vanity, that's just silly.
No more silly than patriarchal religions describing God as "He" just because that suits *their* vanity (heaven forbid they follow orders from a female, divine or otherwise...). bma
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature