|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Prayer for an atheist
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
quote:
We …… are sorry that your spiritual journey has lead you in this direction. Needless to say, we will continue to pray for you all as a family, but especially that you will allow the Lord who you've served for so many years, to reveal Himself to you again and that you will respond in repentance and faith. Possibly the circles you have ministered in in recent years have not fed you spiritually in the way that could have built up your faith and not diminished it in this way. Possibly too, you are tired at the end of a long period of service. We know that 'pastoring the flock' is not an easy task and sometimes it demands more than we recognise, so we shall continue lifting you up to the Lord Jesus and know He will deal with you in His mercy.
Do you see why I was offended? There is no recognition of the recent journey that I have made nor of the place where I am today. It seems to me to be all about them and what they think is best for me, that I become again like them.
Yes I can. This is an attempt to communicate superiority in the form of spiritual sentiments.
I would find it difficult to write such a note myself but may feel it necessary to communicate something rather than be completely silent. It wouldn't have cost anything to shave the sentiments of their superiority.
I certainly wouldn't refer to repentance, returning to Jesus, or use any heavy religious language. I would think very hard about statements regarding prayer in this situation although part of me would want to express something on those lines. I would try to find the most supportive way of describing a desire to pray that I could, and I would try to acknowledge that it must be a difficult time and not been a decision taken lightly. I'm sure I would fail to get it exactly right but I hope I'd communicate that I'd tried.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
On the Dawkins thing--
All it said was "prayers for Professor Dawkins," right? Am I missing something?
Also I'm assuming that the church is in the habit of putting out similar tweets when a public figure has something painful happen--right? This wasn't a one-off?
Because here's what occurs to me--the church is in a damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't position.
If they regularly put out such tweets for other celebrities, and do not do so for Dawkins, people will read evil motives into it.
If they do put one out, well, witness the current furor.
If they change the tweet to something like "Best wishes for Prof. Dawkins", they will have a zillion people up in arms about watering Christianity down, and even giving him less than the best they have to offer.
They can't win.
I really don't see any hint of a "neener, neener" in the tweet as it stands. It's something of a Rorschach test, no? You see in it what you expect to see.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
They can't win.
Yes, which is why it is daft to start off the practice of tweeting that you are praying for particular individuals.
I know a bishop or two, wasn't my stroke serious enough for a public tweet? Do people get tweets for mini-strokes or does it have to be a full blown one? It's a PR disaster waiting to happen.
[ 16. February 2016, 04:37: Message edited by: mdijon ]
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Yes I can. This is an attempt to communicate superiority in the form of spiritual sentiments.
Well, yes and no. Obviously the believer thinks that their position is superior to an atheist position.
But in the context of MW's situation (which appears to be one of a pastor-turned-atheist) these people are talking to someone they know and probably considered a spiritual leader. They may even be using terms that MW himself was using until relatively recently himself.
quote:
I would find it difficult to write such a note myself but may feel it necessary to communicate something rather than be completely silent. It wouldn't have cost anything to shave the sentiments of their superiority.
Yes. I wouldn't ever say this kind of thing to anyone. But then the only time I used (or been around) this kind of language was when I was young-and-insensitive.
I remember well being with another friend who was berating a former believer in public and had to step between them and apologise for his behaviour.
But, all of that said, it is entirely possible that MW's former church was a place where this kind of thing was considered appropriate.
quote:
I certainly wouldn't refer to repentance, returning to Jesus, or use any heavy religious language. I would think very hard about statements regarding prayer in this situation although part of me would want to express something on those lines. I would try to find the most supportive way of describing a desire to pray that I could, and I would try to acknowledge that it must be a difficult time and not been a decision taken lightly. I'm sure I would fail to get it exactly right but I hope I'd communicate that I'd tried.
I generally take the attitude that if prayer works then the person in question doesn't need to know whether they're being prayed for. The only possible situation where it gives any comfort is where prayer itself has no effect and the person is just aware that a bunch of other people are thinking of them.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
OK sorry if I derailed.
I hadn't realized that anyone else used the 'on/off switch' image. It's a bit like finding you have a previously unknown relative. And you've been here a lot longer.
Is there a protocol in these matters? Should I seek some other image? I did always feel that 0 or 1 seemed a bit too definite for me.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Yes I can. This is an attempt to communicate superiority in the form of spiritual sentiments.
Well, yes and no. Obviously the believer thinks that their position is superior to an atheist position.
But in the context of MW's situation (which appears to be one of a pastor-turned-atheist) these people are talking to someone they know and probably considered a spiritual leader. They may even be using terms that MW himself was using until relatively recently himself.
It is this 'obviously' that annoys me. I think you are right - they do think their beliefs are superior to mine (not actually atheist if you read my recent post). Yes, they did consider me a spiritual leader in 1966 ( ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) but they have followed my journey for over 50 years and they know full well that I moved away from their narrow-minded fundamentalist views many years ago. It is their insensitivity that saddens me - and their naivity I suppose.
BTW I have taken your use of the word 'obviously' to mean that it is obvious to my friends. If you are using the term to express your own view - I will pray for you. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
It is this 'obviously' that annoys me. I think you are right - they do think their beliefs are superior to mine (not actually atheist if you read my recent post). Yes, they did consider me a spiritual leader in 1966 ( but they have followed my journey for over 50 years and they know full well that I moved away from their narrow-minded fundamentalist views many years ago. It is their insensitivity that saddens me - and their naivity I suppose.
OK sorry I didn't realise the timeframes were that long. I agree, that's totally unacceptable and insensitive.
quote:
BTW I have taken your use of the word 'obviously' to mean that it is obvious to my friends. If you are using the term to express your own view - I will pray for you.
Please don't.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
Obviously I think my political views, religious views, children's achievements and various other details to be superior to the other human life forms I meet in everyday life. Otherwise I wouldn't hold them.
However I ought to have a bit of humility in how I express myself to others who don't share my views and I don't actually need to communicate that every time we have a discussion that touches on these issues.
By the way prayer could in theory be emotionally comforting and/or actually effective. These don't seem exclusive properties to me. While it is true that the former requires communication of the intent to pray, it is equally true that if the communication is crap there won't be much comfort given.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Obviously I think my political views, religious views, children's achievements and various other details to be superior to the other human life forms I meet in everyday life. Otherwise I wouldn't hold them.
I don't understand why 'obviously'. Why not 'equal to' or 'alternative to'?
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
Obviously in the sense that otherwise I wouldn't have chosen them over the alternatives. So obviously that is my view, but not obviously in the sense that all should agree and are daft if they don't.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pine Marten
Shipmate
# 11068
|
Posted
I don't use Twitter so haven't followed the hoo-ha but I have for decades remembered the following: when doing English lit A-level we had a brilliant teacher, who happily called herself an atheist. I can't now remember the context of the conversation, but when asked what she would say to someone who offered to pray for her, she said enthusiastically, 'oh yes, please!'
Now she was not a believer but recognised the compassion and thought behind the offer. I still remember her with affection.
--------------------
Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead. - Oscar Wilde
Posts: 1731 | From: Isle of Albion | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
... brilliant teacher, who happily called herself an atheist. I can't now remember the context of the conversation, but when asked what she would say to someone who offered to pray for her, she said enthusiastically, 'oh yes, please!'
Now she was not a believer but recognised the compassion and thought behind the offer. I still remember her with affection.
Yes, that's fair - to recognise the compassion behind a prayer,
But, better still, the pray-er should simply pray and tell no one about it.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Actually a huge debate in chaplaincy over whether that is right. Some see someone praying for them without their consent as abusive even if they do not know about it.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Would that not preclude things like praying for victims of [today's natural disaster here]? There is no point in pestering victims of floods in Sri Lanka or tunnel collapses in Asia for permission to pray about their plight. But our natural reaction, when learning of calamities, is to pity and pray for the victims. Surely this is a good thing.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Actually a huge debate in chaplaincy over whether that is right. Some see someone praying for them without their consent as abusive even if they do not know about it.
Jengie
How can someone feel abused about something they know nothing about? That makes no sense.
It is surely kinder to offer prayer, and to graciously accept a refusal, than to fail to offer prayer to someone who would appreciate it? As said earlier, it's the loving action of prayer that some find of great benefit, which would not be received if it were pc to say nothing about it!
Surely an atheist would not be so unkind as to try to prevent prayer from being offered?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I guess it depends on your view and experience of prayer.
There will be people who have been aggressively prayed over who will find the thought of anyone praying for them deeply offensive. Those people who have heard the sort of prayer that says "We pray for our brother/sister X, that they see the error of their ways and are brought back into the fold of our particular brand of Christianity" (or the one I've experienced which said "We pray that the other ministers not present see the youth work issue the way we do and start toeing our party line") or words to that effect. The sort of prayer that Mark Wuntoo reported above. I think of it as the shopping list prayer method, telling God what he needs to provide.
Others see prayer as a way to align their will with God's. In this versions, praying is quiet time to listen to what God is telling them. Which may be provision of hands and feet to support the family or sick person.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
When the CofE prayed for Dawkins, perhaps it was thinking of the C.S.Lewis quote:
quote:
It's so much easier to pray for a bore than to go and see one.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Actually a huge debate in chaplaincy over whether that is right. Some see someone praying for them without their consent as abusive even if they do not know about it.
I think that's too close to thought policing.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pine Marten
Shipmate
# 11068
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Pine Marten:
... brilliant teacher, who happily called herself an atheist. I can't now remember the context of the conversation, but when asked what she would say to someone who offered to pray for her, she said enthusiastically, 'oh yes, please!'
Now she was not a believer but recognised the compassion and thought behind the offer. I still remember her with affection.
Yes, that's fair - to recognise the compassion behind a prayer,
But, better still, the pray-er should simply pray and tell no one about it.
Well, it's too long ago to remember the context, but it was a theoretical proposal during a lesson (on Shakespeare, probably). She was a lovely, wonderful teacher, with an eccentric dress sense ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead. - Oscar Wilde
Posts: 1731 | From: Isle of Albion | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
Raptor Eye: Surely an atheist would not be so unkind as to try to prevent prayer from being offered?
Depending on the circumstances, speaking as a non-theist, I probably would politely ask that someone not pray for me if they asked (rather than stated that they were going to pray for me in which case I would be offended if they knew of my non-belief). I wouldn't and couldn't prevent prayers being said if that's what people want to do. As has been stated already, it's whether it is 'in the public eye' which seems to me to be unbiblical and unwise.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
Re RD ‘mellowing’! As he doesn’t work so hard now promoting the public understanding of Science for which he was Professor not so long ago, then I’ll bet anything that he is still as clearly an atheist as he was! I’m glad he still does interviews and speaking engagements – long may he do so!
mousethief
I have (still have) dear friends who have prayed for me. Offended? Certainly not. Their belief was a part of who they were. I’m sad to say that three of them have died over the past 12 years. The knowledge that we cared much about each other enriched our lives. quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
This assertion is not the truth. The prayers of others have been of benefit to me, and to many people I know personally.
Their thoughts and good wishes have helped you to feel better, or more confident, or whatever the situation required, but ……
Whether the prayer is said aloud or thought; the person is ‘sending’ this to God; this god is then supposed to hear said prayer, decide on action – or, as in 100% (in my firm opinion) of cases – do absolutely nothing; the sender of the prayer assumes there will be a benefit of some sort; the subject of the prayer believes similarly; psychologically probably benefits. The intermediary, god, is totally redundant. It is not the prayer itself which does anything, it is the thinking that goes on in the subject’s mind that benefits.
Anselmina
Your post says it better than the above!
Macrina
I don’t think – wel, I know! – I wouldn’t say that ‘there is no convincing evidence either way’ since that makes it sound a sort of 50:50 case. I’d put it at 99:1 with 99 as the total lack of any convincing evidence of course!
David Good
That sounds like a book I’d very much like to read! I bet I’ll have to wait a while for an audio version though.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
It has happened that I was sick and someone said a Muslim prayer or did an indigenous ritual for me. I appreciated that.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
This assertion is not the truth. The prayers of others have been of benefit to me, and to many people I know personally.
Their thoughts and good wishes have helped you to feel better, or more confident, or whatever the situation required, but ……
Whether the prayer is said aloud or thought; the person is ‘sending’ this to God; this god is then supposed to hear said prayer, decide on action – or, as in 100% (in my firm opinion) of cases – do absolutely nothing; the sender of the prayer assumes there will be a benefit of some sort; the subject of the prayer believes similarly; psychologically probably benefits. The intermediary, god, is totally redundant. It is not the prayer itself which does anything, it is the thinking that goes on in the subject’s mind that benefits.
I am pleased that you accept that your original assertion, that prayer was of no benefit to anyone, was not the truth.
You now accept that knowing that others care enough to pray for us may be of benefit.
As far as what happens when we pray is concerned, your assertion here again is not the truth from my point of view, but a product of your imagination. Prayer is sharing with God, communication within relationship.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
They can't win.
I really don't see any hint of a "neener, neener" in the tweet as it stands. It's something of a Rorschach test, no? You see in it what you expect to see.
There will always be people who will disapprove, no matter the action. However, it took me only a moment to find a better strategy. Do the prayer within a normal church service.
The Tweet served the church no good.
Is it something of a Rorschach test? No. It is a failure in public outreach.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Whether the prayer is said aloud or thought; the person is ‘sending’ this to God; this god is then supposed to hear said prayer, decide on action – or, as in 100% (in my firm opinion) of cases – do absolutely nothing; the sender of the prayer assumes there will be a benefit of some sort; the subject of the prayer believes similarly; psychologically probably benefits. The intermediary, god, is totally redundant. It is not the prayer itself which does anything, it is the thinking that goes on in the subject’s mind that benefits.
This depiction of prayer is a tad crude and admittedly, many people of faith believe this way. If one accepts divine omniscience, then God knows what one is going to pray for anyway, before one utters a word of prayer.
I would say, from a Trinitarian view, that Christ prays through his people, and that prayer is about entering into the eternal dialogue between Father and Son. Insomuch, we pray for the healing of others, we identify our desire for their well-being with Christ's desire for their well-being.
So when the CofE prays for Richard Dawkins, it is affirming that despite Dawkins' disbelief in what he would perceive as a fictional deity, that "fictional" deity still loves Him, and still holds him in divine concern and grace, even when he debates Christian apologists.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
Thank you for your post, Anglican Brat. I'll come back to it later. Today is my visit to the Sisters of Bethany in Southsea.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Susan--
Have a fun, restful time! (Yes, it is possible to have fun at a retreat center. And IME retreat food tends to be good.)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Goode
Shipmate
# 9224
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
David Good
That sounds like a book I’d very much like to read! I bet I’ll have to wait a while for an audio version though.
I've just had a quick word with the author, Professor Whitmarsh, and he's got an audio book of the US edition, published at the end of last calendar year. Please PM with your postal address, or email me with it from this profile page, and I'll send it to you.
Posts: 654 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
No prayer said ever actually benefits the person being prayed for. If a person like RD improved in some way - which he will anyway - then it is entirely due to his own mind and 100% coincidental to (with?) any prayers being said.
What I love about your posts Susan is how you don't let your own views lead you to complete and total certainty.
It's amazing to be sure that NO prayer EVER made a difference. Now indeed, if God is not real, it seems unlikely (although not impossible) that prayer would have an effect, however, I don't know any way to be so certain about the existence/non-existence of anything, never mind God.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Macrina
Shipmate
# 8807
|
Posted
SusanDoris
Thankyou for your thoughts, you gave me cause to think over what I posted. On balance I stand by it. I am 99.9% certain that the 'all powerful, all loving, all knowing' God of the Abrahamic religions does not exist and will say that quite happily.
I am more willing to allow for the existence of a first cause or universal force (personal or not) which might be described as 'God' by humans even if that cause/force/consciousness had no interest or input into humanity. I am not convinced of its existence or unconvinced so remain a functional Atheist but I think the burden of proof would be lighter for this type of 'God' than for our classic understanding of God.
I am fascinated by physics when it gets into these areas and one of my missions this year is to read more physics and cosmology to get my head around what physics now says about our universe.
Posts: 535 | From: Christchurch, New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
It has happened that I was sick and someone said a Muslim prayer or did an indigenous ritual for me. I appreciated that.
Seconded. In fact I remember the Muslim concerned asked first if it would be a comfort or not if they prayed. I was moved by the gesture itself (and of course accepted), but also that the question was put in such a way as to be answerable without implying any belief in their world view but rather in terms of how it would make me feel.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
Raptor Eye: Surely an atheist would not be so unkind as to try to prevent prayer from being offered?
Depending on the circumstances, speaking as a non-theist, I probably would politely ask that someone not pray for me if they asked (rather than stated that they were going to pray for me in which case I would be offended if they knew of my non-belief). I wouldn't and couldn't prevent prayers being said if that's what people want to do. As has been stated already, it's whether it is 'in the public eye' which seems to me to be unbiblical and unwise.
I agree concerning the importance of asking first, sensitively. I think in this case it was a well-meaning gesture, the extension of a hand in prayer that offered friendship.
It is surely a little hypocritical if those who constantly send out messages on social media which mock our faith or make cynical remarks accuse the church of doing the same.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
Raptor Eye: Surely an atheist would not be so unkind as to try to prevent prayer from being offered?
Depending on the circumstances, speaking as a non-theist, I probably would politely ask that someone not pray for me if they asked (rather than stated that they were going to pray for me in which case I would be offended if they knew of my non-belief). I wouldn't and couldn't prevent prayers being said if that's what people want to do. As has been stated already, it's whether it is 'in the public eye' which seems to me to be unbiblical and unwise.
I agree concerning the importance of asking first, sensitively. I think in this case it was a well-meaning gesture, the extension of a hand in prayer that offered friendship.
It is surely a little hypocritical if those who constantly send out messages on social media which mock our faith or make cynical remarks accuse the church of doing the same.
If it was a well-meaning gesture, then the person(s) who made
the tweet need social media training because they failed.
The difference between those who mock your faith and the CofE is that one describes a random assortment of individuals and the other a centralised organisation with official representation. So, comparing apples to eyebolts.
That said, it is much ado about very little. The atheist response should be more 'What evs' then 'How dare you'
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frankenstein
Shipmate
# 16198
|
Posted
Yes!
It is our charitable duty.
Unreported if there is likely to be a misunderstanding.
--------------------
It is better to travel in hope than to arrive?
Posts: 267 | From: Scotland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
If it was a well-meaning gesture, then the person(s) who made
the tweet need social media training because they failed.
The difference between those who mock your faith and the CofE is that one describes a random assortment of individuals and the other a centralised organisation with official representation. So, comparing apples to eyebolts.
That said, it is much ado about very little. The atheist response should be more 'What evs' then 'How dare you'
Those who mock may be individuals or official representatives of associations of atheists.
Much ado about little yes, to score points. Whatever.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
The difference between those who mock your faith and the CofE is that one describes a random assortment of individuals and the other a centralised organisation with official representation.
The difference between those who mock our faith and the CofE is that the former mock, and the latter does not. The former feel smugly superior to all religious people. I have seen no evidence that the CofE feels smugly superior to all atheists.
You're comparing mince pies and meteors.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091
|
Posted
Daniel Dennett wrote an article called ‘Thank Goodness!’, in which he discussed a heart operation in which he very nearly died. In an interview with Julian Baggini, he discusses the article:
“I suppose my favourite line in it was when I said I excused those who said they prayed for me and I resisted the temptation to say, ‘well thank you very much but did you also sacrifice a goat?’ Because did you think that the praying was any more efficacious than sacrificing a goat or any less preposterous? I don’t. You’re saying you prayed for me and I understand you said that with good intention, but if you really wanted to help, there were other things you could have done and the delusion that this somehow helped, I reject that.”
I don't agree with much of what Dennett writes, but this did make me smile.
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
The difference between those who mock your faith and the CofE is that one describes a random assortment of individuals and the other a centralised organisation with official representation.
The difference between those who mock our faith and the CofE is that the former mock, and the latter does not. The former feel smugly superior to all religious people. I have seen no evidence that the CofE feels smugly superior to all atheists.
You're comparing mince pies and meteors.
The CofE as an organisation? maybe. Not the impression that I have gotten from some of those who debate atheists. And there are definitely members of the church who do feel so.
I do know, and have observed smug atheists. But not all of those who mock are smug. Some have are frustrated with the "God just is" smugness of some Christians.
I don't think either side has any moral superiority there.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
The difference between those who mock your faith and the CofE is that one describes a random assortment of individuals and the other a centralised organisation with official representation.
The difference between those who mock our faith and the CofE is that the former mock, and the latter does not. The former feel smugly superior to all religious people. I have seen no evidence that the CofE feels smugly superior to all atheists.
You're comparing mince pies and meteors.
The CofE as an organisation? maybe.
Well, but you specifically were referring to the CofE as "a centralized organization with official representation."
Either you're referring to the organization qua organization, in which case you are wrong, or you're referring to individuals and not the organization qua organization, in which case you are trying to eat your cake and have it.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AlexaHof
Apprentice
# 18555
|
Posted
Just come to this after a difficult log in.
Fascinated by this debate, but there's an important aspect that's ignored when it's discussed purely in terms of giving offence by making the prayer public. Yes, it strikes as a little mischievous of the Anglian church to pray publicly for Dawkins, but perhaps this is forgivable - akin to theological banter - given how provocative D has been in his public statements.
BUT coming now from another, pagan tradition, and taking prayer very seriously, as an act, is it right to pray for others without their consent? If you belief that prayer/healing is powerful (whole issue goes away if you don't) then praying for someone against their wishes, and for a particular outcome, is the worst kind of interference and so unethical.
My full workings-out on this point, and some links to some pertinent pieces on the ethics of prayer in non-Christian traditions, are here: http://www.thesecretlifeofgod.net/pray-not-pray-richard-dawkins-prayer-affair/
--------------------
'God is dead.' Nietzsche
'Nietzsche is dead.' God
Posts: 7 | From: Wiltshire | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
Prayer is surely simply the act of the church breathing, thinking, etc. - the means by which the church metabolises, lives, exists.
The C of E shows a remarkable lack of ability to find its own arse with both hands on a distressing number of occasions. Without prayer as a reflex, I can only imagine how pronounced this tendency would be.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
starbelly
but you can call me Neil
# 25
|
Posted
Given some of the comments on this thread I have an image of a Prayer Police roaming the pews looking for unauthorised intersessions.
"Sir, please stop kneeling and take your hands apart, we have reason to believe you have been praying for Professor Dawkins..."
Neil
Posts: 6009 | From: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AlexaHof:
BUT coming now from another, pagan tradition, and taking prayer very seriously, as an act, is it right to pray for others without their consent? If you belief that prayer/healing is powerful (whole issue goes away if you don't) then praying for someone against their wishes, and for a particular outcome, is the worst kind of interference and so unethical.
If someone has specifically requested that they not be prayed for, I can see this. But shy of that, I think it goes too far. If I pass a car accident on the highway, I don't stop and ask the victims if it's okay to pay for them. I offer up a prayer as I drive by. This would also make it immoral to pray for the unconscious, as they are unable to give consent. In fact it's basically treating prayer like sex. It appears to be saying that without explicit, verbal, ongoing permission (for the prayee is free to change their mind at any point), prayer is a form of rape.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AlexaHof:
If you belief that prayer/healing is powerful (whole issue goes away if you don't) then praying for someone against their wishes, and for a particular outcome, is the worst kind of interference and so unethical.
Welcome aboard, AlexaHof.
I would answer you this way: Prayers are not magic. Prayers are powerful - the prayer of a righteous man availeth much - but prayers for specific outcomes are at the root asking God to do something, and God's not going to act against that person's will.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
