>The only way to "leave the text pristine" is to avoid any translation at all.
Not true. The text is just a vessels for the meaning. Any text carrying the same meaning remains the same.
>Once you translate, you can't help but introduce numerous subtle changes in nuance and meaning.
This is one of the advantages of having a living God. He can affect what happens in the real world.
>From what I understand, in Hebrew all nouns are gendered. If an object has no intrinsic gender, it is typically referred to using the male form. When translating into a language where most nouns are neuter, like English, it is therefore more true to the original text to avoid assigning a gender to God, who has no gender. Or at least that is the argument proponents of a sexless Bible make.
And it would make sense if God were not also referred to as Father.
>Another interesting point is that, while the Old Testament uses the male form when referring to God, it uses the feminine when referring to the Holy Spirit, or the presence of God.
I find these arguments juvenile. Any sensible adult knows gender and sex are traits of God's creation, not God. Questions asking the gender of God invariably are borne of ignorance or guile.
I have time for neither.