"The Glory of God"..........even though you don't believe you must of heard this phrase.
2007-08-29 18:15:42 · 12 answers · asked by . 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
All such terms are an expression of man's investment in an object of veneration. The glory given is more important than what is glorified.
As Oscar Wilde said: "The only reason for making a useless object is that one admire it intensely. All art is quite useless."
Now, he was talking about art, but the idea of veneration existing only for the sake of its action is an exercise common to human existence and which all humans need on one level or another. Whether it be a political figure, a celebrity, a system of belief, even God, mankind requires something to love to the point of veneration, to invest with that aura that is attained by an object that the objectifier has chosen to be more worthy than himself.
Many believe in God and are comforted by an object to love and worship; human emotion is a weapon that needs a very big target, and, to those who believe, God is quite big.
2007-08-29 18:30:29 · answer #1 · answered by Jack B, sinistral 5 · 7⤊ 1⤋
The glory of the person who is using the term
2007-08-29 18:37:34 · answer #2 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You know, I've never understood the phrase.
Even if I were theistic, a human effort could by definition not bring about any "Glory of God" -- I would think it would be blasphemous to try; a Tower of Babel sort of thing.
So when someone says, "For the Glory of God", I think they're just being pithy. But if I were religious, I think I would be offended.
2007-08-29 18:27:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
i'm "formally" an agnostic atheist (or sturdy agnostic, or susceptible atheist, reckoning on who's doing the defining) - i don't think of we can probable know if a god exists, yet i don't think it particularly is probable that one does. i don't particularly prefer to label myself nevertheless, as i think of it particularly is ludicrous that there is a label for not being some thing. i'm additionally not a fireman or a doctor, and that i'm a-Santa Clausist and a-unicornist. I very lots perceive with Secular Humanism. There are additionally aspects of rationalism that I accept as true with (maximum, i think). I in basic terms particularly know approximately postmodernism as an inventive and literary circulation--yet making use of those techniques to philosophy without reading lots on it i think of i will effectively say i'm not postmodernist...will we choose a label for that too?
2016-11-13 20:05:57 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I understand God as a metaphor quite well.
(In fact, I claim that is all anyone does, just that most people don't realize they worship a metaphor. But I digress.)
God as metaphor is ultimate perfect combination of love and justice (and other attributes that are sometimes emphasized).
The "Glory of God" is the awe one feels when one is able to imagine perfect love & justice.
2007-08-29 18:37:46 · answer #5 · answered by Jim L 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Traci Lords
2007-08-29 18:29:15 · answer #6 · answered by Jack 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Can't say I remember seeing it in the bible. I'm sure Christians somewhere say it, but does that mean anything? You guys always do stuff "for the glory of God". Like killing heathens.
2007-08-29 18:25:39 · answer #7 · answered by The Son of Man 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Never given it much thought really. However, if I had to come up with a definition, I would say it is that part of the nature of a god that is good and worthy of respect.
2007-08-29 18:32:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
it's what Christians say to excuse their own behaviour, and to avoid responsibility for it. They also use it to take the credit for good deeds from people they don't "approve" of, and pass on the credit to god instead.
2007-08-29 18:31:34 · answer #9 · answered by MJF 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Christian murderers always proclaim their actions to be for "...the glory of god..!"
2007-08-29 18:33:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋