A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife


<<< Article index

“My husband does not accept the afterlife …”

This question of a husband - or a family member or some other person close to you - not believing in the afterlife and thinking that you are loco or something like that has been asked many times. What do you tell him/her?

Introduction: First it is critical to state that there has never ever been anyone in this world- no scientist, no philosopher, no theologian or anybody else who has shown or proven that the afterlife does not or cannot exist. On the contrary, there have been and there are scientists and empiricists who have shown that the afterlife exists.

People who vehemently do not accept the afterlife are those who are repeating what some uninformed person has told them and have not done reading and thinking about the afterlife for themselves.

The following are actual common complaints by those who do not accept the afterlife/paranormal:

1. “Why are you wasting your time on this?”

Well now, you, me and everybody else in this world will one day die. Neither you nor anyone else has shown me there is nothing after we die. Is it not reasonable to see why many brilliant scientists - who have done a lot more research than you and me - are saying that life after death does exist? If you had a heart problem and if you have to have a triple by-pass, wouldn’t you go to a heart specialist? You wouldn’t say – “I know more than all these heart specialists!” Why is it then, that when I raise the issue of the MOST important thing on this earth you and some others suddenly become ‘know-it-alls’ in this most critical, sensitive area of afterlife evidence?

2. “What scientists are you talking about?”

Good question – what scientists? Over the last one hundred years there have been scientists of the highest caliber who used their scientific knowledge and after investigating the afterlife they came to accept that the afterlife exists. Some of these scientists include Sir Oliver Lodge, Sir William Crookes, Sir William Barrett – and so many more. Recently scientists are confirming what these earlier scientists accepted as evidence for the afterlife – scientists such as Professor Gary Schwartz, go to www.victorzammit.com click on Chapter 2.

3. “Why are you letting these people con you?”

I know we all have to be careful about being conned. These days we come across lots of people trying to con you and me. And is it not possible that someone conned you into rejecting the possibility that the afterlife exists? I know we all have to be discriminating. I know I have to think for myself about information which is given to me. I have to assess the information to see if it makes sense, and see if there is proof of what is being said which would convince a highly intelligent person with an open mind. Then and only then I will tentatively accept the information and see if it is borne out by my personal experience.

4. “It’s all religious mumbo jumbo!”

That is a familiar cliché stated by many non-believers. And you are repeating it because you think that gives some support to your own beliefs – which incidentally you just cannot prove.

Understanding that the afterlife exists has nothing to do with religion. It’s a branch of physics. Empiricists and scientists do not have the luxury of beliefs. And scientists have nothing to do with religion. The critical scientific evidence for the afterlife has far more substance than religion. Religion is theory. Afterlife scientific evidence has been obtained by empirical (scientific) testing. Accepting the evidence is vastly different from ‘believing’ in any religion. Some people think that religion is mumbo jumbo – they may be right, they may be wrong. Some who do not believe in anything themselves believe in their own ‘mumbo jumbo.’ I do NOT believe, I ACCEPT the evidence for the afterlife.

5. “In what way are science and religion different?”

Well, religion is a personal belief. Religion cannot be independently substantiated by taking it into a laboratory to test it. No one can use science to show that a particular religion is a valid. No one can use science to prove that Jesus died for the ungodly. All religion necessarily is personal belief. And all personal beliefs are subject to complete invalidation.

Arthur Findlay in The Psychic Stream showed that all religions arose through attempts to explain the psychic and other dimensional experiences of groups of people in terms of their own knowledge at the time. It is most interesting to re-state that our Christian beliefs were formalized in the year 325AD at the Council of Nicea. That is where Christian theology was initiated. Most fundamental Christian theological beliefs have not changed at all since that time- that is 1680 years ago!

But in the twenty first century, as our communication methods and technology have increased beyond our expectations we have been able to collate and analyse people’s psychic experiences on a global scale never possible before. As a result we are able to measure the frequency of occurrence of experiences, compare them across cultures, and predict their occurrence. This is science not religion.

Now using scientific method to measure phenomena is totally different. Science has to do with accurate prediction, with repeatability. This is because when experimenters have an empirical formula and they test the formula over time and space and keep all circumstances constant, they get the same results. That is science and that is what I mean when I say that afterlife information these days is ‘empirical’. There are some twenty one areas of empirical (scientific) evidence for the existence of the afterlife and up until now no scientist, no theology expert, no philosopher or anybody else has ever rebutted, refuted or shown that this evidence is not or cannot be valid –see A LAWYER PRESENTS THE EVIDENCE FOR THE AFTERLIFE www.victorzammit.com

6. “There is nothing in it and why are you so stupid believe it?”

As I said, you have to learn how to discriminate between that which is repeatable and empirically predictable and that which is not. Would you not say that one would have to be absolutely stupid to fail to investigate information given to us by some of the most intelligent scientists who ever walked this planet Earth – since we ALL have to die? Especially, when there has never ever been any scientist or empiricist or to show that what these great scientists discovered about the afterlife cannot be valid. We have to be long term thinkers to make sure we will get a good deal on crossing over. Short term thinkers are defeatists and the real losers. Besides, I remind you, ‘accepting’ the evidence is different from ‘believing’.

7. But does not science says when you’re dead you’re dead?

Absolutely not! Specifically WHICH scientist says that? There have been great scientists these last one hundred years who used their scientific skills to investigate the afterlife and confirmed the existence of the afterlife. All of these scientists were fairly skeptical before they investigated. There are scientists who did NOT investigate, who never bothered to analyze the empirical results of the afterlife evidence and have the impudence to make all kinds of mischievous anti-afterlife statements. But these scientists do NOT have the authority to make ANY statements about the afterlife because they FAILED to investigate it.

8. Are you trying to tell me that scientists can be wrong?

Absolutely! Just because a scientist is working as a scientist it does not give him ANY authority to make comments about the afterlife UNLESS the scientist investigated the afterlife himself or herself. Many scientists AFTER investigating the evidence actually ACCEPTED the existence of the afterlife – as I mentioned in 7 above .