Life After Death Scientifically Proven

And you don’t have to be a Christian…

"A group of British scientists, including two astrophysicists, a thermodynamicist, and other professional researchers, are conducting experiments and solving complex equations that they believe furnish conclusive and irrefutable proof of human survival of bodily death.

The group has come to regard that continuation as the functioning of a natural, universal law, the study of which is strictly a branch of chemistry, physics, and mathematics, rather than an article of religious faith.

This scientific approach to a subject which heretofore has been discussed mainly as a function of theology is stirring lively debate, not only in Britain, but worldwide. The assertion that immortality is conferred on humankind through natural law alone, rather than by an all-powerful, monotheistic God, is awakening interest and triggering penetrating questions from the general public, including churchgoers, as they become more fully informed about prospects for continuing existence beyond the transition known as “death.”

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/snyder.html

Best part → “Dying is as natural as being born; we all pass into the next world whether we like it or not. There is no special place reserved for Christians or members of any other sect. There are no social strata or racial barriers. We all graduate to the level we have earned by the development of our characters.”

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Been reading through (the Catholic Q&A Continues thread) Wow! I used to think that very few people actually genuinely followed this stuff and that most just did for the sake of appearances. Thought only the few demented ones did – now it seems like that a whole lot of people believe this.

This is shocking to me, like finding out that 60% of people believe in the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy…and they really mean it.

We are fucked. Wow!!![/quote]Now ya jist had to go n do that didn’t ya!!! I have never believed in the Easter Bunny in my life sir, but I DEMAND that you explain to me what happened to all those teeth under my pillow then??? HMMMMM??? I suppose Ayn Rand took em to add to her necklace??? Just as I thought. Another mindless curmudgeonly skeptic out to spread his corrosive lies everywhere he goes.

Church. You n me. Come on. You can experience the horror of being surrounded by people who really believe this stuff. You can sit in the spot I’ve been savin for Push. He won’t mind.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
And you don’t have to be a Christian…

"A group of British scientists, including two astrophysicists, a thermodynamicist, and other professional researchers, are conducting experiments and solving complex equations that they believe furnish conclusive and irrefutable proof of human survival of bodily death.

The group has come to regard that continuation as the functioning of a natural, universal law, the study of which is strictly a branch of chemistry, physics, and mathematics, rather than an article of religious faith.

This scientific approach to a subject which heretofore has been discussed mainly as a function of theology is stirring lively debate, not only in Britain, but worldwide. The assertion that immortality is conferred on humankind through natural law alone, rather than by an all-powerful, monotheistic God, is awakening interest and triggering penetrating questions from the general public, including churchgoers, as they become more fully informed about prospects for continuing existence beyond the transition known as “death.”

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/snyder.html

Best part → “Dying is as natural as being born; we all pass into the next world whether we like it or not. There is no special place reserved for Christians or members of any other sect. There are no social strata or racial barriers. We all graduate to the level we have earned by the development of our characters.”
[/quote]I just don’t have the heart man LOL!!! Maybe Ayn Rand DOES have my teeth after all LOL!!!

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
And you don’t have to be a Christian…

"A group of British scientists, including two astrophysicists, a thermodynamicist, and other professional researchers, are conducting experiments and solving complex equations that they believe furnish conclusive and irrefutable proof of human survival of bodily death.

The group has come to regard that continuation as the functioning of a natural, universal law, the study of which is strictly a branch of chemistry, physics, and mathematics, rather than an article of religious faith.

This scientific approach to a subject which heretofore has been discussed mainly as a function of theology is stirring lively debate, not only in Britain, but worldwide. The assertion that immortality is conferred on humankind through natural law alone, rather than by an all-powerful, monotheistic God, is awakening interest and triggering penetrating questions from the general public, including churchgoers, as they become more fully informed about prospects for continuing existence beyond the transition known as “death.”

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/snyder.html

Best part → “Dying is as natural as being born; we all pass into the next world whether we like it or not. There is no special place reserved for Christians or members of any other sect. There are no social strata or racial barriers. We all graduate to the level we have earned by the development of our characters.”
[/quote]I just don’t have the heart man LOL!!! Maybe Ayn Rand DOES have my teeth after all LOL!!!
[/quote]

Is this why there aren’t any teeth in arguments proposed by Christians?

You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Apparently the meaning has changed somewhat since I was at school, if the article is anything to go by. And by somewhat I mean totally.

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Well, I’m pretty sure he knows what 80 proof means.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

There are no social strata or racial barriers. We all graduate to the level we have earned by the development of our characters."
[/quote]

I do like this statement.

That article sucked.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Apparently the meaning has changed somewhat since I was at school, if the article is anything to go by. And by somewhat I mean totally.[/quote]

Some people are never satisfied.

Jesus never even existed yet people believe in Jesus.

Scientists say something, construct extremely high probability models…and its obviously false.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Apparently the meaning has changed somewhat since I was at school, if the article is anything to go by. And by somewhat I mean totally.[/quote]

Some people are never satisfied.

Jesus never even existed yet people believe in Jesus.

Scientists say something, construct extremely high probability models…and its obviously false.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
[/quote]

LOL I just had to get in on this comment.

You do realize that even secular scientists have no doubt about Jesus’ existence? They disagree about his divinity, but his existence is pretty well known and accepted.

And I suppose Aristotle or Descartes never existed either? They pre-date Jesus’ earthly life yet you and your kind don’t doubt their existence.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Apparently the meaning has changed somewhat since I was at school, if the article is anything to go by. And by somewhat I mean totally.[/quote]

Some people are never satisfied.

Jesus never even existed yet people believe in Jesus.

Scientists say something, construct extremely high probability models…and its obviously false.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
[/quote]

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! right back at ya. Really, what the FUCK do you see in that article proof wise?

You’re behaving just like a fundie/zealot. Zero proof. Weak rhetoric. I especially like how you include the ‘character’ statement like that had ANY proof behind it or any relevance at all.
Really? Up your game, you’re just embarrassing us non believers in religion. I happen to agree with you on the Espinoza’s god issue, btw. So nice try at tagging me with the wrong label.

But ffs, this is just drivel.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< Is this why there aren’t any teeth in arguments proposed by Christians?[/quote]Metaphysics or epistemology thread. Let’s see your teeth. We missed ya at church today. Great Father’s Day service. Lotsa folks praising God, asking that he teach them to deny themselves, live for Him and serve others in His name. All the stuff yer most interested in.

[quote]forbes wrote:

And I suppose Aristotle or Descartes never existed either?

They pre-date Jesus’ earthly life yet you and your kind don’t doubt their existence. [/quote]

Descartes lived about 1600 years after Jesus is supposed to have died.

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

And I suppose Aristotle or Descartes never existed either?

They pre-date Jesus’ earthly life yet you and your kind don’t doubt their existence. [/quote]

Descartes lived about 1600 years after Jesus is supposed to have died.

[/quote]

Well it seems you are correct. However my point still stands that there are plenty of individuals who lived before Jesus but their existence is not disputed. I was confusing Descartes with other ancient philosophers.

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Apparently the meaning has changed somewhat since I was at school, if the article is anything to go by. And by somewhat I mean totally.[/quote]

Some people are never satisfied.

Jesus never even existed yet people believe in Jesus.

Scientists say something, construct extremely high probability models…and its obviously false.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
[/quote]

LOL I just had to get in on this comment.

You do realize that even secular scientists have no doubt about Jesus’ existence? They disagree about his divinity, but his existence is pretty well known and accepted.

And I suppose Aristotle or Descartes never existed either? They pre-date Jesus’ earthly life yet you and your kind don’t doubt their existence. [/quote]

Descartes predates Jesus? Uh…okay

Descartes does come before his horse…de cart before the horse…LOL!

Prove Jesus existed w/o using the Synoptic legends.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:<<< Is this why there aren’t any teeth in arguments proposed by Christians?[/quote]Metaphysics or epistemology thread. Let’s see your teeth. We missed ya at church today. Great Father’s Day service. Lotsa folks praising God, asking that he teach them to deny themselves, live for Him and serve others in His name. All the stuff yer most interested in.
[/quote]

Why did God design people to act for their rational self-interest (we hope) and then tell them to torment themselves by denying their want for personal happiness? Happiness as a rational animal (Eudaimonia) is Man’s proper moral stance, one that follows from his nature.

Your God wants man to act unnaturally, yet created him to…do…exactly…that.

Rigged game.

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

And I suppose Aristotle or Descartes never existed either?

They pre-date Jesus’ earthly life yet you and your kind don’t doubt their existence. [/quote]

Descartes lived about 1600 years after Jesus is supposed to have died.

[/quote]

Well it seems you are correct. However my point still stands that there are plenty of individuals who lived before Jesus but their existence is not disputed. I was confusing Descartes with other ancient philosophers. [/quote]

Maybe you were thinking of Mithra?

"The Vatican was built upon the grounds previously devoted to the worship of Mithra (600 B.C.). The Orthodox Christian hierarchy is nearly identical to the Mithraic version. Virtually all of the elements of Orthodox Christian rituals, from miter, wafer, water baptism, alter, and doxology, were adopted from the Mithra and earlier pagan mystery religions. The religion of Mithra preceded Christianity by roughly six hundred years. Mithraic worship at one time covered a large portion of the ancient world. It flourished as late as the second century. The Messianic idea originated in ancient Persia and this is where the Jewish and Christian concepts of a Savior came from. Mithra, as the sun god of ancient Persia, had the following karmic similarities with Jesus: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen048.html

Sorry, guys. Jesus = Mithra.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
You do know the meaning of the word “proof” ?

[/quote]

Apparently the meaning has changed somewhat since I was at school, if the article is anything to go by. And by somewhat I mean totally.[/quote]

Some people are never satisfied.

Jesus never even existed yet people believe in Jesus.

Scientists say something, construct extremely high probability models…and its obviously false.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
[/quote]

LOL I just had to get in on this comment.

You do realize that even secular scientists have no doubt about Jesus’ existence? They disagree about his divinity, but his existence is pretty well known and accepted.

And I suppose Aristotle or Descartes never existed either? They pre-date Jesus’ earthly life yet you and your kind don’t doubt their existence. [/quote]

Descartes predates Jesus? Uh…okay

Descartes does come before his horse…de cart before the horse…LOL!

Prove Jesus existed w/o using the Synoptic legends.
[/quote]

As I said, I stand corrected. I confused major philosophers together. ANYWAYS, my point still stands that even individuals before Jesus are still considered to have existed and are even quoted in our schools.

Many other sources besides the gospels speak of Jesus.

We have the early church fathers (who’s writings are not scripture), false gospels that were never considered scripture but still make reference to Jesus and were written not too long after him. There is also a letter from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar describing his encounter with him, which can be read here: Jesus Descriptions from Eyewitnesses

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

Why did God design people to act for their rational self-interest (we hope) and then tell them to torment themselves by denying their want for personal happiness? Happiness as a rational animal (Eudaimonia) is Man’s proper moral stance, one that follows from his nature.

[/quote]

Just in case anyone takes laughing boy seriously:

“Epicureanism as a movement gathered strength before its founder’s death and continued for another seven centuries, waxing and waning, inciting both popular enthusiasm and sharp criticism. Many philosophers of the ancient world allied themselves with the school, devoting themselves to what they perceived to be the path to true happiness. Both Lucretius (99-44 B.C.) and Diogenes of Oenoanda (c. 200 A.D.) were products of this discipleship. Other prominent figures experimented with Epicureanism at some time in their lives without becoming committed to it. Horace and Vergil were both Epicureans in their youth but distanced themselves in later years. Also among these was Cicero (106-43 B.C.), who would become one of the most outspoken Roman detractors of Epicureanism. He expressed his contempt for Epicurus’s moral philosophy and theology in many of his works, including De Finibus and De Natura Deorum.”

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Cicero%2C%20Marcus%20Tullius