In another thread, which shall remain uncited, and nameless, I had a brief exchange with a poster who may wish to continue to be the same, but need not if it suits him. (Pretty vague, huh?) I just want to elicit the discussion which was a hijack there, into its own thread. The original participant is certainly welcome to answer, but it is the general case that I would like to explore.
Now suppose you are intellectually a hard atheist. You believe that there is no god. You have this belief because of your own thorough examination of reality, and logic, and certainly not because of any emotional bias, or prejudice. It’s simple, it’s fact based, and you believe it to be true. There simply is not, and reasonably could not be a god.
Now further suppose that there are three of us in the exchange, me, you, and a third party known only as the sufferer. We know nothing of the sufferer other than he is reasonably to be believed to be truthful, and not engaged in any particular deception with respect to himself, us, or God. The sufferer has told us of his suffering, and his emotional response to its cause. Each of us has known, and interacted with the sufferer, and consider him not to be a stranger.
Ok, so, several initiating possibilities exist, and the end result might vary depending on them. Either the sufferer himself asks for our prayers, or, I offer my own prayers for him. Socially, it’s your conversational turn. Do you feel uncomfortable? Do you feel that the exchange thus far has unreasonably pushed my or our religious beliefs on to you? Does it matter who we suggested or stated we would pray to? Will your reply specifically mention prayer at all?
After the discussion gets rolling (if it does) we can get into alternate scenarios, but the one here really is the door through which I would like to enter the debate. Theists will please wait patiently for a few posts if that is possible, to give atheists a fair chance to provide answers.
Tris