After life stuff is all pure speculation. Why does no one ever ask where they were before this life began? There is not a shred of evidence from anyone that they existed before this existence......
All this talk about soul and after life is just imagination to keep yourself from dealing with the reality that you will cease to exist some time in the future. Why is that so hard for people to accept?

I agree, birth is the beginning of individual experience and death is the end of individual experience. and That's all folks!

The old make way for the new, from death comes new life, from destruction comes regeneration. Death and destruction are necessary parts of the process of creative advance. We are all made from the heavy elements generated in supernova explosions. (a resurrection of sorts?)

I agree, birth is the beginning of individual experience and death is the end of individual experience. and That's all folks!

The old make way for the new, from death comes new life, from destruction comes regeneration. Death and destruction are necessary parts of the process of creative advance. We are all made from the heavy elements generated in supernova explosions. (a resurrection of sorts?)

After life stuff is all pure speculation. Why does no one ever ask where they were before this life began? There is not a shred of evidence from anyone that they existed before this existence. So why not face the consistency? If you have no recollection of an existence before this one, why can you not conclude that there will not be an existence after this one? It is consistent with reality. No life before, there will be no life after. It is even more absurd to make the claim that you didn't exist prior to this existence but then you will exist for ever after this existence. If something has the property of coming into existence IT MUST also have the property of ceasing to exist. You can't have something that is made then permanent.

All this talk about soul and after life is just imagination to keep yourself from dealing with the reality that you will cease to exist some time in the future. Why is that so hard for people to accept?

I'm not claiming I can prove an after life or that we have previous lives, that would be futile. I believe in the possibility by personal experience. My only comments where based on the idea , what would it be like? The argument against can be put in the manner of "what would you do with an infinite amount of time",I tried answering those types of questions. If you want to base it purely on proof of it, then I have no evidence, none a all. You cant dismiss it because you believe it to be just wishful thinking, that is just as futile.

Time and entropy do not flow in the afterlife, if they did those existing there would have to burn energy to exist. It is more like existing in a ever changing "NOW" Moment

How can you make the above comments as if they are factual, in reality you just do not know if there is really an afterlife or not

It is known, it is just that most people are unwilling to accept the facts of the matter and believe what they want to believe regardless of any evidence. With most people, when the evidence points in a direction that they do not like, they ignore the evidence. So people believe all sorts of foolishness and nonsense about an afterlife.

The only evidence I can think of of an afterlife would be something like Stevenson's collected information about reincarnation.

Ian Stevenson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ian Stevenson - Reincarnation research

Also, for a good essay on afterlives and in particular immortality, see Keith Augustine's The Case Against Immortality.

The Case Against Immortality

Perhaps I was not sufficiently clear. I was responding to the claim, "in reality you just do not know if there is really an afterlife or not", which I think is false. The question of whether there is an afterlife or not is not difficult to answer, if one is not prejudiced about the matter. But most people do not want to believe certain things, and so they do not, no matter what the evidence suggests.

Perhaps I was not sufficiently clear. I was responding to the claim, "in reality you just do not know if there is really an afterlife or not", which I think is false. The question of whether there is an afterlife or not is not difficult to answer, if one is not prejudiced about the matter. But most people do not want to believe certain things, and so they do not, no matter what the evidence suggests.

Yes I know. I was just expanding on the matter. I agree that we can and some people do know whether there is an afterlife or not, and the answer is of course "not".

How can you make the above comments as if they are factual, in reality you just do not know if there is really an afterlife or not

Yes I know. I was just expanding on the matter. I agree that we can and some people do know whether there is an afterlife or not, and the answer is of course "not".

Depends on if you subscribe to the notion of a soul/spirit. I think in some ways free will(for those who subscribe to the notion) implies we have a soul/spirit. That being the case what is a soul? Is it energy? If so energy can never be destroyed. Is it something beyond the material world? If so, I see no reason to think ones soul would cease to exist anymore than a number can cease to exist or anything else which exists beyond the material. After all many people contend that "they" are not their bodies nor are "they" their minds.

Belief in God is another great reason to believe in the afterlife. If you can buy that God exists, well then how does He exist? As energy? An entity? Or something beyond the material? It would seem completely reasonable to me to conclude that if God can exist beyond the material then other things could as well.

Time and entropy do not flow in the afterlife, if they did those existing there would have to burn energy to exist. It is more like existing in a ever changing "NOW" Moment

Such an existence can not exist. You can't have any actions within a timeless realm. It defies definition. To do anything, first you must have time.

If you existed in this realm you call an ever changing now moment it makes no sense without time existing. You can't have change in a timeless realm because time itself IS change. It is the difference between one moment and the next.

So what you propose here is a contradiction in terms. You can't have change without time. If you can then photographs should show moving people. They do not. A single photograph is the representation of a realm without time.

To me the opposite is obvious, it would be impossible for there to not be an afterlife. So, please, elaborate =)