<p>
[quote]
Screw him. Glorify me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, screw you, loser!</p>
<p>Justinian, you really are 13. Agnostic does not have to doubt his motives, but merely doubt what other people say are his motives. What that really means is the agnostic doesn't know his motives.</p>
<p>Thats the spirit, business_boy!</p>
<p>WOW! Zogoto, I never realized the expanse of definitions for this word. I see you becoming the next Socrates of philosophy</p>
<p>sure, the problems may be minimized, but they will never go away. You will never achieve closure. The problem, in this case, is predestined because it will exist (though minimized) however hard you try to get rid of it.</p>
<p>Secondly, I don't think anything in the field of philosophy has ever been proved (possibly deduced, but never induced).</p>
<p>It may be possible to live in spite of a lack of free will, but that does not apply to me. If free will failed to exist, I would have dropped out of HS long ago.</p>
<p>What that really means is the agnostic doesn't know his motives.--right...but a doubt of motives (regardless of a belief in god) is agnostic thought.</p>
<p>^^^ In that case, dont glorify or screw anyone.</p>
<p>No I do think there are motives.</p>
<p>Business Boi:No, screw you, loser!</p>
<p>Again, you have managed to transcend rational discussion into a personal attack. There is a man who is confident of his ability to engage in logical discussion. Instead of that, why not answer this: Why worship a self glorifying god?</p>
<p>Why should we worship a self-glorifying god? God glorifies himself because he is God. God shouldn't be on our level. Just as a king wishes to be respected by his subjects, so we should worship God. We are his subjects.</p>
<p>For the record and following the analogy, absolutism has been done away with because it does not work. Jesus was not quite on our level either (jesus could understand the abstract concept (the abstraction rather) of god...he had to be better than a human and transcend humanity). Yet Jesus was humble. </p>
<p>Why the discrepancy?</p>
<p>Then again, the British are Her Majestys subjects. Why doesnt the queen glorify herself?</p>
<p>Religion certainly does not want to portray itself alongside of royal absolutism...if so, i can certainly see the end of christianity in sight.</p>
<p>Jesus was humble to teach us to be humble. He was kind to teach us to be kind. Yet he is still God. Why does absolutism not work. We should give full and total respect and adherence God, Trancestorm. If absolutism does not exist, then why even worship a God. Why the discrepancy?</p>
<p>it's a different absolutism than what is suggested by our modern perception, in which the ruler is good and merciful to his subjects</p>
<p>The queen is not God, goldfish. Thats why she doesn't glorify herself. Thats why I diffentiated between royalty and God. God is the king of kings, of course!</p>
<p>So god expects us to follow behavior that he himself does not follow. That is like a smoking father telling his child not to smoke. What about leading by example? I though god WAS righteous and followed his own standard, but i guess this is just another one of the self contradicting aspects of christianity.</p>
<p>Justinian: If absolutism does not exist, then why even worship a God. </p>
<p>I think you hit the point straight on (albeit from an weird approach). Do NOT worship a god is what this gets at.</p>
<p>Why does god deserve to be the king of kings any more than I do?</p>
<p>Everything has an origin. What is god's origin?</p>
<p>Trancestorm, God is not a smoking father. All of his ways are good and right. I don't quite understand the first part of your post as it contradicts itself throughout. We are to give full respect to God. It almost sounds as if you are a humanist.</p>
<p>God is the Alpha and the Omega</p>