a lot of the misunderstandings about Christianity come from a lack of wisdom about human nature

I'm just wondering how a being that is supposed to be the source of all that is good and just would need or even want to be worshipped, much less give eternal punishment to those that don't.

 

I certainly agree with that.

Beyond that, humans populated Earth a very short time ago and Earth will be incinerated in a few short billions of years. What was God doing with the REST of his time?

After all, human time on Earth divided by eternity = 0.

And, that doesn't even BEGIN to give an idea of what God is up to.

 

I'll start with one of the best. The website describes what a Ganzfeld experiment is. Note in bold the flimsy tunnel vision of a diehard skeptic who applies rigid materialistic standards to phenomena that can’t be boxed into a tight schedule.

https://psychology wikia.org/wiki/Ganzfeld experiment

Parapsychologists such as Dean Radin and Daryl J. Bem say that ganzfeld experiments have yielded results that deviate from randomness to a significant degree, and that these results present some of the strongest quantifiable evidence for telepathy to date. Critics such as Susan Blackmore and Ray Hyman say that the results are inconclusive, and call for further study before such results can be scientifically accepted.

Between 1974 and 2004, 88 ganzfeld experiments were done, reporting 1,008 hits in 3,145 tests. In 1982, Charles Honorton presented a paper at the annual convention of the Parapsychological Association which summarized the results of the ganzfeld experiments up to that date, and concluded that they represented sufficient evidence to demonstrate the existence of psi. Ray Hyman, a skeptical psychologist, disagreed.

The PRL trials continued till September 1989. Of the 354 trials, 122 produced direct hits. This is a 34% hit rate, and is similar statistically to the 37% hit rate of the 1985 meta-analysis (25% is expected by chance). The 34% hit rate is statistically significant with a z score of 3.89, meaning that there is a 1 in 45,000 chance that a hit rate of at least 34% is observed in the experiment when the true hit probability would really be 25%

In a 1995 paper discussing some of the challenges, deficiencies and achievements of modern laboratory parapsychology Ray Hyman said,

Obviously, I do not believe that the contemporary findings of parapsychology,… justify concluding that anomalous mental phenomena have been proven. [A]cceptable evidence for the presence of anomalous cognition must be based on a positive theory that tells us when psi should and should not be present. Until we have such a theory, the claim that anomalous cognition has been demonstrated is empty.[...] I want to state that I believe that the SAIC experiments as well as the contemporary ganzfeld experiments display methodological and statistical sophistication well above previous parapsychological research. Despite better controls and careful use of statistical inference, the investigators seem to be getting significant results that do not appear to derive from the more obvious flaws of previous research.

 

I'm fine with people continuing to study parapsychology in the sense that we should be studying everything. And, I do believe there have been some improvements in methodology.

However, I don't see these experiments convincing the world of science at this point.

 

The double slit experiment has a history going back to at least 1930, yet the significance of it is still being largely brushed aside.

The “onslaught” of ever-tightening scientific strictness attempting to discourage recognition of psi phenomena as legitimate has had the opposite effect, i.e. confirming that reality is more than just the empirical, the physical and material.

Yet the diehard skeptics insist on pointing out the lack of conformance to objective physical consistency, as in the cop-out previously indicated in bold print. Objection to the elusiveness of psi phenomena does not justify such casual dismissal.

Ultimately, the claim that mind is more fundamental than material is likely to prevail.

 

NO. The issues of quantum physics and Einstein are absolutely CENTRAL to much of the explorations of physics. It is top of mind in particle physics as well as in astrophysics. You can't seriously think that physics is fine with having two distinct models that both work perfectly in their own realms, but do not otherwise come to equivalent conclusions.

Also, physics (and science in general) DOES get better and better at detection and measurement as well as improving in methodology for testing. In fact, that is a fundamental objective. If that is a problem for those in the realm of Psi, that's just their tough luck. Better detection and measurement and constantly improving methodology can NOT be considered problems. Those advances are strong assets in understanding this universe.

I don't believe there is any evidence that Psi is being dismissed casually.

I don't happen to share your rosy outlook for your ideas of "mind", but I'm fine with you and others working on this.

 

Then I think you really did not understand the OP.

Answer to your question was already explained in the first few pages of this thread.

You can also read this thread that might help answer your question:
"A good God wouldn't have a Hell"

 

Particle physics is just more of the same preoccupation with objective physical reality. It is only one half of the wave-particle duality that determines reality.

Some physicists have become dismayed by the unwieldiness of a standard model that has been endlessly increasing in absurd complexity and proliferation of new particles.

 

I'm not sure I understand your comment about studying physics. I don't see the tools for studying all problems in physics as being identical regardless of the topic being studied.

And, what do you propose to do when new particles do get discovered?

 

I was recalling discussions by notable experts offered by YouTube, perhaps so-called TED talks (nobody ever states what TED stands for).

I'm in no position to comment on particles that exist for only terribly short amounts of time.

 

An important aspect of the "hell question" is the word translated "forever" from both Hebrew as well as Green truly means something more along the lines of "until the end of conditions last" which fits with the explanation for the negative afterlife realms as shown to near death experiencer George Ritchie in 1943... .. decades before String Theory was well known.......

Any sort of "hell" that can be graduated out of is really more like the idea of a Jewish or Roman Catholic concept of a Purgatory........

 

Particle physics has been increasingly subjected to criticism and distrust for many years. Here's a few samples.

Why Do People Say We've Reached the End of Physics? 1yr ago:


Physics is still in crisis 1 yr ago:


What's Beyond Physics? | Episode 802 | Closer To Truth 1 yr ago:


Jean-Pierre Lasota - The End of Physics as We Knew It 1 yr ago:


The crisis of particle physics | Sabine Hossenfelder, John Ellis & Jim Baggott 9 months ago:


Particle Physicists Continue Empty Promises 11 months ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qqEU1Q-gYE

 

My issue is not punishment for doing wrong, even a 3 year old understands that one. My issue is the extreme punishment that Hell represents and the fact that God knows who is going to fail (omniscience). Let's say you are a sex addict and you've had too many affairs to count. Should you be punished? Without a doubt. Should you be punished forever? Let's take a look at what that means. Forever is infinite and without end. That means that even the smallest punishment is multiplied by infinity... every punishment causes an infinite amount of misery! Now, throughout the Bible, God has pushed for punishments that are equal to the crime. Eye for an eye is the most famous example, and Jesus, we did one better and said we should just turn the other cheek.

As for God being Omniscient, if He literally know all, which means that at the moment of your creation, He knows if you are going to heaven or hell, why create a being He KNOWS is going to suffer for all of eternity?

 

Humans are hairless apes with big brains. We have our high intelligence but it exists with an animalistic base brain. This is why irrationality and violence are so common among humans. Just watch a video of chimpanzees fighting, add big brains, and thats us.

Religions realized these human animalistic weaknesses but without modern science interpreted them differently. They cast them in moral terms as "sins of the flesh", "inherently sinful", etc etc.

 

The kicker is that not all animals are so violent as us and chimps. Not even all primates are. Orangutan are down right gentle. We should strive to be more like them than like chimps. We are closely related to both.

 

Those are both excellent points that I have never seen a believer answer to, other than those who distinguish themselves as not believing in eternal punishment and/or God knowing all.

 

God knows some will screw up, completely reject Him.. He gave us salvation, a way to receive forgiveness,, but He's not forcing that on us.. that freewill thing , ya' know.
It's your choice to suffer for all eternity,, I'd think, just in case the Bible is all true, that I'd take steps to understand Him.

 

I don't think there is enough time and effort within one human being to get in line with all possible Gods, especially when so many of them conflict with one another and demand you can't side with multiple.

I also don't think it would be moral to bow down to a tyrant version of God who would punish me for not doing so.

 

Once again, another example of someone trying to change the topic in this thread.

No one is going to answer that here. Post it in the right thread, or start your own thread.