God was there for him.
God was there, for him.
I dont want to discuss god. And the masculine gender is a choice, not a statement. I want to look at what lies inside the additional comma in the second sentence.
The first is a biggy.
That comma contains the entire extent of Probability as we understand it. This, is the glory of our simple brains (sic)
The difference between the two is the difference between god being there and him, being the reason god was there. These are the extreme ends of the scale on which Probability stretches. At these ends god either matters entirely or to the degree the "Him" matters.
The second is an observation.
When a believer thinks god is there for them, then god is there for them. But to a non believer, every testament of how "God was there for him" becomes "God was there, for him." because god isnt there, for them. The whole of Probability is in that comma.
People will try and pile all kinds of personal view into the reasons behind this, but in fact there is really only one reason. Dissonance. On both sides.
Whether or not you are the kind of person who hopes to make a difference in the world (which is really just about how you describe the size of your world) - and whether you believe or not, believers and all want their good to spread.
Wouldn't it better for all if we lived within probability and kept the comma in mind?
Not as an accusation, but as reminder that god isnt there, for him.