I would hazzard the guess that by “God” you mean the “christianist” antropomorphised God of beleif, as distinct from Deity Itself as beyond limited human apprehension. In other words, the poll is about whether people who do not accept a particualr traditional and limited view of God are broken.
They may or may not be, and it isn’t by any means dependent on whether they believe in an anthropomorphized God. I say that because the non dualist aprehension of God is not, it would seem, included in your poll question. And non dualists are far from “broken.” Au contrair. So you might include another option in your poll: “Are people who rely on faith, there being so many of them, as a beleief system distinct from actual knowledge, broken?” And further: " Are people, Catholic or not, who have near identical experiences and conclusions drawn from mystical and contemplative experiences, not beliefs, they not necessarily having contact with each other over time and space in many cases, are they broken?"
Further: “Are people who in all sincerity back away from any particular belief system about God, in order to critically examine thier beliefs, their origins, and how they themselves acquired such beleifs, and through what means, and the reliability of those, are they broken?”
The question seems to assume that to lack knowledge or faith in something is to necessarily be psychologically damaged in some way. This would mean that all possible errors in reason and judgement would be due to some kind of psychotic condition.
I don’t think I can agree with that; but I might be interpreting you wrong.
Could you please explain what you mean by broken?
A rational atheist is somebody who either thinks there is no evidence for God, or feels that there isn’t enough compelling evidence as such that one is rationally obligated to devote ones entire life to a deity.
Faith is usually seen as a pragmatic choice, a choice that one is not obligated to fulfil.
What does this Mean?
That’s a discussion you don’t wanna get into. Gaber is a master of obfuscation.
Not broken…just blind.
The proper title for this thread would be:
All people are broken.
Every person is broken, that is why we need confession and Holy Mass.
A very sad example of misanthropy.
Misanthropy is the hatred or dislike of people. To say that we are all broken does not imply that I don’t love people. It is an admission of imperfection. We all have faults. Or are you perfect? :rolleyes:
I think he means a personified image of God – a God which behaves just like a human.
If not explicitly, then effectively.
I’m perfect. :angel1: Once I thought I wasn’t, but I was wrong. :shrug:
OK - I’ll try.
I love all people, and all people are broken.
Based on my experience in life, I would agree. Some people are just better at concealing it than others, but everyone has something in their lives they are not happy with or suffer from. I don’t think this is by any means unique to those who don’t believe in G-d.
I went ahead and voted yes.
People who don’t believe in God are broken. They just don’t always know it unless they try believing in God. Those believe in God are broken and they know it. :whacky:
Besides, “yes” had fewer votes so I went with the underdogs.
I think a good percentage of atheists are well aware that they’re as damaged as anyone else (I would imagine the percentages are about even distributed between believers and nonbelievers.) I voted “No” though, because the OP implies that nonbelievers are somehow “more” broken than us, which I don’t believe at all.
Yeah, actually that was my first instinct too, but then I got swayed by some of the discussion.
Your right, if they don’t want to get to heaven they don’t have to. Because it would require the slightest change of the will :shrug:!
But they would feel a greater separation from their creator, the one who breathed in them and gave them life!!! I would feel very broken unless I was veiled from that fact! Even if that was the case, I would think their was something that was missing later in life… Something important…