No pope needed

@Zavjeru Bible teaches the only middle man is Jesus

Catholics @Doctor Anon

The Pope as a Representative is heresy and sinful

I would agree. He is a man therefore fallible.

I'm cool with living beside Christians as much as the next guy, hell, Martin Luther was kind of a boss... but why would you still actually, you know, believe in that stuff?

>athiest

Atheist 🙄

Agnostic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregational_church

Atheist lite

Oh, I am an Atheist as well, just narrowing it down 😉

Like I said, got nothing against Christians

And I got nothing against you

Just curious

The answer is faith.

So you value faith over empiricism?

I’m not going to elaborate

Fair enough. I am honestly curious.

Values do matter very much to me.

If you are indeed curious either read a bible or attend a local church service. They would be much better at answering your questions in person than one can do online.

I've attended many, I used to be a Christian when I was young myself. I was curious why individuals here would still believe in it.

And I read the bible already

I used to be athiest, then i converted.

atheism is depressing

sad life

So you converted because you found it to be too much emotionally?

no

So why did you convert?

Why accept the void of nothingness? If I am wrong when I die I’ll never know. Yet if I am right and atheism is wrong well that sucks for atheist.

Pascal's Wager has been debunked

I converted after looking into the odds of humanity existing, and drawing correlations between the big bang theory and the biblical story of creation. Among hundreds of other correlations between scientific fact and biblical teachings. I think science is not anti-christian, quite the opposite.

Hello!

Intelligent design is a good thing to look into.

Gwyn, you are aware that Pascal's Wager has been debunked, correct?

Doctor Anon - Which creation story are you talking about?

its been DEBUNKED xdxdxd

🤣

Pray tell who came back from the dead and told us idiots?

It's simple rationality. You would have to apply it to all faiths, not just one. So there is the Pascal's Wager of Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Taoism, etc... Each one, by not believing in them, you are taking a risk. Pascal's Wager only applies to believing in some sort of afterlife-reward versus not, but the problem arises when you take into account that there are thousands of different possible ones to believe in, and most are quite exclusionary for receiving the ultimate prize.

This is without taking into account the fact that if one lives their life according to a religious code that prevents them from fully experiencing their short time on earth and they are wrong, then they have squandered precious years of a finite existence.

Therefore, Pascal's Wager, even from a superficial analysis, is quite flawed.

^^