Do you believe in god?

[Unicorndreams24]

i have recently been thinking a lot about religion and wondering how many believe in god and also what made you come to the decision of believing?

Apart from that wee bugger next door to me :-)

I joke of course.

Apologies, because I follow US stuff on this, because many of them are mad as hatters ( I will come back to that), so it might not be totally the same as the UK.

And no, I am not connecting religion with mental health, hear me out.

We are all familiar with the usual "thoughts and prayers" whenever there is a school shooting. Even when it's a school or Church with people praying that is shot up, "thoughts and prayers" is rolled out, followed by "we need more Church, more God, ban video games", and now it's "mental health"

And in many cases, the shooting is a mental health thing

Here is a typical Christian article. More sin in society because it's being ignored by preachers.

Ignoring Sin in Churches Is Fueling Its Spread in Society - Charisma Magazine Online (mycharisma.com)

"Today, sin manifests openly across culture, from lawlessness in the streets to corruption in leadership. "

We know how the Churches work. Only religion can reduce crime, and sin. Put God back into schools and all that.

But no. "Mad as a hatter". That was Mercury that done that. Rising crime in the mid to late 20th century: that was adding lead to petrol. Oh, and back to Legion. Not a Demon, most likely schizophrenia

The leaded petrol is now pretty much beyond dispute now. I did check for academic papers before posting. The discussion now appears to be over what % of crime rise was caused by it.

So sin in kids ? Nah. Society was poisoning us for decades, with lead.

And check the news from the Met Police today. Murder rate in London lowest in over a decade. Should it not be sky high given we have less religion than ever before ?

Sin doesn’t exist in real life - it’s just a religious concept

Something like it exists - every society has its taboo behaviours: punishable by shame, banishment or death. Only religions hold that people begin life with a burden of guilt, though.

A cynical observer might remark that being born into 'sin', like being born into bondage or a low caste, could be a handy way to control a population - having a natural spiritual deficit, they must do what's demanded of them to balance their account.

I see what you’re saying; I can’t speak for other faiths but it isn’t quite this for Christians. Christians aren’t claiming sin exists as a measurable substance, but as a way of describing a universal human reality: that people consistently fail to live up to their own moral standards, let alone others’.

We also would not say that Christianity teaches children are born with a “burden of guilt”. In the Christian tradition I’m part of, children aren’t taught they are guilty or worthless. They are taught that they are loved, valuable, and morally responsible, and that all people share a universal tendency towards selfishness that needs grace, forgiveness, and restraint — not fear or coercion.

Historically, Christianity has often done the opposite of social control: it has challenged caste systems, undermined ideas of inherent superiority, and insisted that rulers and institutions are as morally accountable as anyone else. Abuse of religious ideas for control certainly exists, but that’s true of secular ideologies too, and it’s not the same thing as the beliefs themselves. But I think your points are very interesting and may have merit certainly with other faiths; I can only speak to how I understand the Christian faith.

@Parker231

Perhaps I can try again to explain some of the basis of my faith. Some things may not be real to you within your belief framework, just as some things you hold to be real aren’t part of mine. That doesn’t mean either of us is being cruel — it means we’re starting from different first principles.

I was explaining the Christian view in response to a question, not claiming that others must share it. In a plural society, it has to be possible for people to hold different convictions and still respect one another’s right to teach their children accordingly.

Beautifully stated. Thank you.

I’ll always be grateful this wasn’t something our DC’s had to grow up hanging over them.

What do you do which fails to live up to your own moral standards let alone others?

I can’t think of anything I do which fits into this?

In Mark 7, Jesus explains that what truly defiles a person doesn’t come from outside them, but from within — from the human heart. He lists things like selfishness, pride, envy, malice and lack of self-control, making the point that moral failure isn’t just about breaking rules or social conditioning, but about our inner dispositions and desires.

That is what Christians mean by sin: the recognition that there are often gaps between what we believe is good and how we actually think, desire, and act. Christianity gives a particular name and framework to that human reality.

That is what I, as a Christian, believe about sin. I fully accept that we have different worldviews, and I respect that you interpret human behaviour through a different lens. I hope you can understand that I’m simply explaining my own beliefs, not asking you to share them.

I’m sure the population as a whole try and act and behave in a good way. They don’t need any religious guidance to do that. Being a Christian doesn’t mean that person is more likely to behave well than an atheist.

I agree with you — Christianity doesn’t claim that Christians are morally better than atheists, or that belief makes someone behave better. That isn’t what I’m saying, and it isn’t what the Christian idea of sin means.

In fact, Christianity starts from the opposite assumption: that Christians are not exempt from moral failure. Sin, in Christian terms, isn’t a comparative claim (“we’re better than others”), but a universal one — that all people, believers included, fall short of their own ideals and of loving others as they should.

That’s why Christianity doesn’t point to Christians as evidence of moral success, but to grace, forgiveness, and the need for ongoing change. I’m simply explaining that framework, not making claims about who behaves better or worse. Perhaps that hasn’t been clear from my posts, for which I apologise.

Is being ‘good’ even such an important trait for humans (or any other species)?

So a religious framework isn’t required as it doesn’t make any difference as to whether someone behaves as a decent human being - most of us do anyway

Just be a decent human being - no “rules” just look after your family.

I don’t disagree that many people behave decently without a religious framework. Christianity doesn’t claim a monopoly on moral behaviour, and it doesn’t say religion is required for people to act kindly or responsibly.

Where Christianity differs is in what it understands the gospel to be: not a system for making good people better, but the message that God acts to rescue people who fall short — through Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection — offering forgiveness and restoration that we don’t earn by good behaviour. Salvation, in Christian terms, isn’t a reward for being decent, but a gift of grace.

That’s why sin matters within Christianity: not as a way of ranking people, but as the backdrop to grace. I recognise that we believe different things, and I respect that you interpret human behaviour and meaning through a different worldview. I hope it’s clear I’m simply explaining what I believe, not insisting others share. Perhaps this isn’t coming across to you so I may need to try harder.

So you behave a certain way because of sin, whereas I behave a certain way because I’m a decent human being?

Christianity doesn’t say people behave well because they are sinners, or that atheists behave well because they are decent while Christians don’t. I don’t believe I said that, though I’m sorry if that was the takeaway from my post.

Perhaps I can explain more clearly. The difference is in how human behaviour is interpreted. From a Christian perspective, all people — including Christians — are capable of genuine goodness and also of moral failure. The word “sin” is simply the Christian name for that shared human condition, of following our own hearts rather than loving perfectly. It isn’t a judgement on you personally, and it isn’t a claim of moral superiority.

You interpret human behaviour through a different framework, and I respect that. The I’m explaining how I understand it as a Christian, not imposing that view on you. I hope that provides a bit more clarity. I’m happy to answer genuine questions, though I’m not a theologian — I can only try to explain my faith as I lean on it from Scripture and from my relationship with Jesus.

No religious upbringing at all really but a keen singer so joined the choir at local church and am very much ‘aware’ of religion. I do have a massive sense of right v wrong and now I am getting on a bit I’m seriously assessing how I’m going to get on if I make it to ‘the pearly gates’
Must admit I’m slightly concerned and wondering if it’s all too late to register my interest with the almighty …. Let’s say I want to believe I’ve tried my best aside from a few major gaffs…. And I am hoping for the best !

What is ‘genuine goodness’ and how does it help a species to survive?

I love that you’re being so honest — and from a Christian perspective, honestly, it’s never too late. Salvation isn’t something you earn — it’s a gift. Everything — literally everything — is forgiven. No ranking, no looking back at your past, no “points lost.” Think of the thief on the cross: nothing to offer, no time left, and Jesus just says, “Today you’ll be with me in paradise.” Done. Finished. Everything forgiven.

And can I just say — how amazing that you sing? That’s such a wonderful gift. Being drawn to music, lifting your voice in a choir, finding joy and beauty through song… I really think that’s part of how God reaches people sometimes. I’m a terrible singer but try! You’re not too late. God’s gift of salvation is already there for you, it is what I love about the gospel!

From a Christian perspective, “genuine goodness” isn’t about evolutionary advantage or helping a species survive — it’s about acting in line with God’s design for love, justice, and moral responsibility. Christianity isn’t primarily a guide to biological survival — the Bible speaks to it being about the spiritual and relational flourishing of people in relationship with God, and the call to love God and others even when it’s costly or difficult.

That’s the biblical framework I’m working from. I recognise that others interpret human behaviour through different lenses, and that’s perfectly fine. I’m simply explaining my own perspective.

It's just a coincidence that being "good" is an evolutionary survival advantage to a pack species animal such as us ?

:-)

Can you explain then why so much of God's design seems to be about controlling who people love and share their lives with? Why is he so focused on all things related to love and sexuality?

I wouldn’t say ‘being good’ is among the top survival advantages of a species.

I’m just curious why so much religious focus is on ‘being good’? Obviously cooperation among society members is helpful, but is ‘being good’ really that important for a species to survive?

I would have thought that adaptability is way more important for a species to evolve.

Who does God intend His people to love?

According to the teachings of Christ His disciples are to love our families, our church family, our neighbours and our enemies, basically everyone around us, treating people as we would like to be treated ourselves. And of course our first love is to be for God, with Whom we are in an eternal relationship.

I don't see Christ particularly "focussing" on sexuality any more than on other aspects of human existence. Marriage is honourable as is singleness in His teaching and in further teaching by His Apostles.