Do you live for your glory or God's glory

[Aupmanyav]

But to me the Brahman you describe is a form of Theos, very much the same as Tao, and the God I worship, funny isn't it, I think the God described in the Old Testament is a false god, or negative force, if he is as described in the Bible, so I guess to many Christians I might be deemed an atheist too.

No, Brahman is in no way God for me. It is the entity which constitutes all things in the universe, you, me, the brown dog in the street, water, air, stones in River Ganges, stars, galaxies, dark matter and dark energy. "Eko Brahman, dwiteeyo nasti" (Brahman is one, there is no second). without any exception. Do not know and do not need information about any other religion.

 

[Lyndon]

That's actually very close to the concept pantheism, the idea that God is everything in the universe. You don't have to call it God, I know it has bad connotations for you.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

My reality and faith is based on God ie an creator God as in the Christian faith. Many people have a man (science) based faith and reality defined by truth as defined or suggested by science.

From my perspective if science were a faith (which it very much isn't to the vast majority of people that use it) it wouldn't be a man based faith, but a nature based one. Lauding the beauty and complexity of the universe and striving to understand its many amazing qualities.

If anything I would describe Abrahamic faiths as far more man based faiths. In science, humans are a tiny and insignificant dust speck in the cosmos, it takes the humblest position on man's place in the universe. In Abrahamic faiths, humans are the most important thing in the cosmos. And the vast majority of Abrahamic conversations is about what will happen to man, man's morality, man's mortality, man's fate, man's reward, man's punishment. It is obsessed with man.

 

[George-ananda]

Do you have a God centered faith or a man centered faith?

I come from a non-dualist perspective (God and creation are not-two). So my best answer to your question is 'both'. We are a spark of God searching for our home.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Do you have a God centered faith or a man centered faith?

God-centred.

 

[Shiranui117]

Do you have a God centered faith or a man centered faith?

I live to improve myself in all aspects. That brings glory both to me and to God.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

I don't see a dichotomy between God and science, God is science and science is God,

I agree, even most miracles referenced in the Hebrew bible are super-normal events not supernatural events. I can define those words and how I use each word of anyone wants. That said there is a very obvious dislike of any mention of God or even an intelligent creator among some of the men and women of science, not science itself imo. Ideally science should be non-biased and its goal is to describe the natural world using the methodology of discipline. However, at times science is infected with the emotions of men and they corrupt what should be an neutral explanation etc. Even with the corruption our science works well, and is the best tool for discovery* etc that we have.
* Discovery of the material world.

there is nothing unscientific about God, and much of God's power is the laws of nature or science. Science cannot be more powerful than God, because science was created by God IMHO

I do not agree with that quote. One of many unscientific nuances of God is hat God is eternal. Of course that is unscientific because nothing is eternal in the natural universe. So that is why I say some things of God are supernatural. Also a good way to decide if something is supernatural vs super-normal is that supernatural events or objects violate the laws of physics. The supernatural abilities of God and of God existing is why our science can not describe what happened 'before' the big bang. The realm before the big bang could not hold any temporal based thing, like atoms and energy. However I am open to the universe being created by a super race of unbelievably advanced beings that evolved up to 12 billion years before the human race came on the scene. If they do exist we humans could very well be farther down the intelligence and evolutionary scale than a bacteria compared to them. They would be indistinguishable from God. Again this is why I do not think many if any of even highly advanced races can exceed the speed of light, the light speed barrier protects us from many paradoxes.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

I'm a layperson. The gods are glorious, but they aren't the center of my life.

 

[arthra]

"Glory of God" is also a title of Baha'u'llah:

The name 'Bahá’u’lláh' is an Arabic title which translates to 'Glory of God'.

http://oneglobalfaith.org/bahai-faith/bahaullah/the-glory-of-god/

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

I'm a layperson. The gods are glorious, but they aren't the center of my life.

I earned my degrees by going to night college on my VA assistance while I worked for two decades as a iron-worker for an international company (Fluor Corp) and so, since I did not do the traditional academic route I consider myself a layperson as well. When I say God is my 'reality anchor' I mean I make sense of the universe using Gods word and teachings. I also employ/mix some science when making decisions etc. Of course a few of my atheist friends are not adverse to telling me using God to make important decisions etc isn't rational in their opinion. Lastly according to the teachings of Jesus Christ all Christians should teach or at least mention what the gospels are and what they mean world wide. Without salvation only death and Sheol (see notes), awaits all humans after the corporal body dies. Both God and I love all of humanity as brothers and sisters as we are joined by both biological and spiritual blood. So understanding that I hope those of you that at some time or other in the past have been angered while a well meaning Christian attempted have you accept Jesus as your savior understand why we do that. Again its because we really think those that do not accept Jesus are actually committing suicide right in front of us!

Notes;* SHEOL...... Personally I reject the notion a classical hell exists for humans. Sheol mentioned in the bible is a better candidate. Dictionary definition;....... She'ol, in the Hebrew Bible, is a place of darkness to which (edit for brevity) the unrighteous go, regardless of the moral choices made in life, a place of stillness and darkness cut off from life and from the Hebrew God.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sheol



God Bless to all that will accept the blessing ~ and peace on earth ~

 

[RRex]

. . . Personally I reject the notion a classical hell exists for humans. Sheol mentioned in the bible is a better candidate. Dictionary definition;....... She'ol, in the Hebrew Bible, is a place of darkness to which (edit for brevity) the unrighteous go, regardless of the moral choices made in life, a place of stillness and darkness cut off from life and from the Hebrew God.

Sounds like the same thing to me. Your soul is still marooned.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I do not understand why people feel this must be either/ or. Live for your own glory as well as the glory of God(s), and whatever else is important to you.

Because in some cases you can't make a left and right turn at the same time on Anders St. or go NS on highway 92 to Battersville.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Because in some cases you can't make a left and right turn at the same time on Anders St. or go NS on highway 92 to Battersville.

Likewise, if you're living for the glory of God, you aren't living for the betterment of humanity.

 

[Liu]

To live for one's own glory is to live for Satan's glory Additionally, I'm a pantheist, so I consider god and self to be one anyway.
So, both. Or maybe neither for it's not exactly glory I aim for.

 

[Aštra’el]

Because in some cases you can't make a left and right turn at the same time on Anders St. or go NS on highway 92 to Battersville.

Like when? When can one not simultaneously live for their own glory as well as the glory of God(s)?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Likewise, if you're living for the glory of God, you aren't living for the betterment of humanity.

If it's the OP's context, humanity as being the opposing and negative end of living for god, then yep, you can't do both. It's one or the other.

Unless one can be a foundation of the other?

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Likewise, if you're living for the glory of God, you aren't living for the betterment of humanity.

I can't speak for others who live for the Glory of God, but I'm certainly not living for the betterment of humanity.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Like when? When can one not simultaneously live for their own glory as well as the glory of God(s)?

Since the OP is talking about a specific god, if you put the glory of humunity as the same as god, you made man an idol. Its only possible if you define god differently.

 

[Aštra’el]

Since the OP is talking about a specific god, if you put the glory of humunity as the same as god, you made man an idol. Its only possible if you define god differently.

We may be talking about the same thing, but you are phrasing it differently which makes it seem like so much more than it actually is. I didn't say "put the glory of humanity as the same as God", rather, live for your own glory as well as the glory of God(s).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

We may be talking about the same thing, but you are phrasing it differently which makes it seem like so much more than it actually is. I didn't say "put the glory of humanity as the same as God", rather, live for your own glory as well as the glory of God(s).

When you are living both for the glory of god and the glory of humanity, you are basically saying they are both equally important. In the OP, the god he is talking about you can't live for both of them. Going by his belief, you have to choose one or the other or they will conflict since god doesn't care for idols.

Now, if you had your own definition of god, then you can live for both and be cool. I don't think the OP meant it that way, though.

I also have a pet peeve when people say "why can't it be both" or "This doesn't apply to me." It's kind of avoiding the purpose of the OPs on many threads that are seriously looking for a either/or answer.