Ancient stone tablet may prove resurrection predated Jesus

[Clownboat]

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.ph ... sus-Christ

The three-foot-high mysterious stone tablet, which has been written on rather than carved, is known as the Angel Gabriel’s Vision of Revelation.
Israel Knohl, biblical studies professor at Jerusalem's Hebrew University, has concluded the key line 80 of the text as Gabriel telling a historic Jewish rebel named Simon, who was killed by the Romans in 4 BC: "In three days you shall live, I Gabriel, command you."
"This sheds new light on the messianic activity of Jesus," Knohl said to Reuters news agency. "It proves that the concept of the messiah was already there before Jesus,"

Then you have the Epic of Gilgamesh that has similar aspects to the flood story.
The Garden of Eden story is also similar to an earlier myth.

Question for debate: What does this suggest about he Bible being God inspired if in actuality the stories themselves are not original?

[mgb]

Argument from personal incredulity??? You might not say 'it is inconceivable.'.. but lets see you show that anybody said it was 'random firing'.. it is discharging due to lack of oxygen.. but is it 'random'?

I am using the word 'random' in the simple common sense of the word. I am saying that it is unlikely that processes in a dying brain would contain information structured in such a way that it would constitute a chemical analogue of the structure of information in the experience itself because the experience is intelligible.

[LiamOS]

Can you prove that NDEs are fully coherent and propose a mechanism for their occurrence?

You need to stop making endless demands for proof. I would not make these kinds of demands on you because I know proof/disproof is not forthcoming in such matters as we are discussing.

So where there's no proof, it's true?

If NDEs have a physical or biological explanation, present it. If they do not have anything to do with physics, they are by definition irrelevant to the universe.

[Goat]

Can you prove that NDEs are fully coherent and propose a mechanism for their occurrence?

You need to stop making endless demands for proof. I would not make these kinds of demands on you because I know proof/disproof is not forthcoming in such matters as we are discussing.

This is a debate forum. I can show the mechanism for a fully coherent and show a mechanism that demonstrates that it is just the brain.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/s ... 140165.ece

News article.. an electrical cascade happens to the brain at the moment of death.

[mgb]

Can you prove that NDEs are fully coherent and propose a mechanism for their occurrence?

You need to stop making endless demands for proof. I would not make these kinds of demands on you because I know proof/disproof is not forthcoming in such matters as we are discussing.

This is a debate forum. I can show the mechanism for a fully coherent and show a mechanism that demonstrates that it is just the brain.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/s ... 140165.ece

News article.. an electrical cascade happens to the brain at the moment of death.

No. This does not demonstrate anything. Merely having an opinion is not a demonstration. Here's a quote from the article-

"Parnia believes Chawla’s research is interesting, but treats its conclusions with caution, pointing out that there is no proof that the electrical surge observed by Chawla is linked to a near-death experience. "

[mgb]

Can you prove that NDEs are fully coherent and propose a mechanism for their occurrence?

You need to stop making endless demands for proof. I would not make these kinds of demands on you because I know proof/disproof is not forthcoming in such matters as we are discussing.

So where there's no proof, it's true?

If NDEs have a physical or biological explanation, present it. If they do not have anything to do with physics, they are by definition irrelevant to the universe.

Why? This is a Logical Positivist statement.

[LiamOS]

So?

When you signed up to the forum, you agreed to substantiate your claims if asked and to either retract or qualify as opinion those which you could not.

[nygreenguy]

I am talking
about subject matter such as is discussed in Raymond Moody's book Life After Life not salvia and aliens.

So because you do not agree with my experience, it's moot?
Cherry pickin'?

I am saying that if your experience did not have an intelligible narrative that does not detract from the ones that do. I am saying that this intelligible narrative is unlikely to be explained by random biological events.

Isnt this just an argument to incredulity?

[Goat]

Can you prove that NDEs are fully coherent and propose a mechanism for their occurrence?

You need to stop making endless demands for proof. I would not make these kinds of demands on you because I know proof/disproof is not forthcoming in such matters as we are discussing.

This is a debate forum. I can show the mechanism for a fully coherent and show a mechanism that demonstrates that it is just the brain.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/s ... 140165.ece

News article.. an electrical cascade happens to the brain at the moment of death.

No. This does not demonstrate anything. Merely having an opinion is not a demonstration. Here's a quote from the article-

"Parnia believes Chawla’s research is interesting, but treats its conclusions with caution, pointing out that there is no proof that the electrical surge observed by Chawla is linked to a near-death experience. "

Yes, he does treat it with caution. However, it is a logical conclusion, based on the current evidence. It does show that when a brain becomes oxygen deprived, there is a discharge of energy in the brain... and Chawla's research shows that it is consistent.

It certainly is a heck of a lot more credible for it to be claimed 'They are going to an afterlife'.

It does demonstrate something.. despite your denial. It shows that the brain has a surge of activity when oxygen deprived, such as what happens when blood stops circulating.

[mgb]

This is a bit like seeing ripples on the surface of the sea and concluding that sea monsters exist. There is just not enough 'meat' on this article to merit a proper discussion.

[Goat]

This is a bit like seeing ripples on the surface of the sea and concluding that sea monsters exist. There is just not enough 'meat' on this article to merit a proper discussion.

That's only because you want to reject the findings. It is far more than just 'ripples looking for a sea monster'. It is pointing to a testable, and repeatable physical phenomena that happens happens every time someone goes through the process of dying.
It at least happens every time someone who is hooked up to an EEG dies.... that at the moment of death, the brain goes through a 'brain storm' as the oxygen gets depleted.

That explanation explains why there are so many similarities in NDE's , and also explains
the 'life passing before your eyes'.. because of neural stimulation of areas of the brain the hold old memories.

Which explanation has less unknowns?? The brain discharging causing specific and biologically induced experiences, or insisting that it is something 'beyond' the brain. We know the brain exists. We know that people memories are found in the brain patterns. By use of the EEG , we see a 'brain storm' at the moment of death when there is oxygen deprivation.

We do not have any evidence that any of the experiences found in NDE's are beyond the brain.

It might not be 100% proof yet.. but it's extremely strong evidence.