It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Proof Life is Eternal

page: 1
10
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:02 PM
I'll try to keep as concise as possible. I've meditate over this concept for a while now and not too long ago I've came to one conclusion: Life is eternal.

Here is why. Lets look at two possibilities.

1) Life is eternal... so there is no beginning or end. It is a constant.

2) Life is not eternal, but starts and end. For this to be true, that means we came into existent from nothing. So we became something from nothing. And if this is true, then that mean it can happen again. Thus meaning, maybe 100 millions more year after you die, the same you might be birth again. So life isn't eternal but splotchy. Meaning there are gaps. But gaps are just time and when we don't exists, we do not know the concept of time. So, to ourselves, we are rebirth instantaneously, thus it is still eternal. Birth, life, death, birth again.

Anyways, I hope that made sense. Maybe I can reword it different or better but that is the jist of it.

Edit: For those who ask for where is the proof? How do I prove to you that the sun exists other than the fact that you stare up to the sky and see it for yourself. To see the proof, one must look for themselves.
edit on 16-3-2016 by reddragon2015 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:09 PM

And where's the proof? All I see is an opinion.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:13 PM

Its generally a bad idea to use the word "proof" in thread titles....

its like an open invitation to unwanted critisizm

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:16 PM

I'd say that is very likely. I mean the only any of us can say for certain now is "I am". I may not know anything else for certain other than I exist currently. Also, I know if we go back in time to before I was born I have no knowledge of anything at all. As if I wasn't existing then. But "I am" existing now. Meaning your theory would seem to be true and that I was either born into existence at some point or I was waiting somewhere else and just have no memory of it.

However, one main difference is that even though "life" itself is eternal and as a part of life I too am eternal, who I think of as me or my ego self isn't. So it's not as if memories of my life now or who I think I am now is eternal. Even though perhaps my life energy is. So saying we are eternal isn't the same as saying my ego self is eternal. The person I think I am now doesn't go past death just like he wasn't around before birth. Those are just products of memory and my environment that have been stored in to an ego self. That would seem to die along with my physical self even if some other energy or force does in fact get recycled again.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:19 PM

Ummmm, is this you asking for proof, or lack of it? Or is there a super secret invisible bit?

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:30 PM

originally posted by: reddragon2015

Edit: For those who ask for where is the proof? How do I prove to you that the sun exists other than the fact that you stare up to the sky and see it for yourself. To see the proof, one must look for themselves.

No, proof is objective, it is testable. There isn't anything resembling proof here. Don't worry, no thread that has the word proof in the title has ever demonstrated the proof the claimed so it's not like anybody will be disappointed. The lack of proof was a foregone conclusion the moment you claimed it.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:07 PM
I agree, energy cannot be created or destroyed meaning that the energy that we call our consciousness cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change forms.

We are each a different form of the universal consciousness that is ever-changing and ever-evolving, going through an eternal cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Just like with the seasons coming and going yearly, we too come and go in a cyclical manner.

What lies after death? The same thing that came before birth, a "nothingness". What did that "nothingness" lead to? What we are experiencing right now. The same goes for after death, we change into the next form of life through rebirth, an emergence from that same nothingness that is supposedly after death.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:23 PM
So because you 'meditated over it', that constitutes proof? You might want to re-check what 'proof' actually means. As to your point, life most certainly is not eternal, ie. Having no beginning or end. We know for a fact that the universe had a very definite beginning, so life most certainly had a beginning at some point after that.

the energy that we call our consciousness cannot be created or destroyed

...Is also nothing more than speculation on your part. There is no evidence that consciousness is a form of energy. None.
edit on 3/16/2016 by AdmireTheDistance because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:32 PM
I am pretty sure the OP is either playing a silly game, or does not get that proof is more than saying something is so. At most he has had a gnosis, those are almost never able to be proven, and are unique to the individual.

So I ask, please can I see some proof. Don't play the game of silly platitudes about sun. The sun can be measured, eternal life? Yeah not so much.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:37 PM
Wouldn't you need to define life in the context of your thread.

Obviously, you aren't talking about human life, because I think I can "prove" all humans die, unless you can think of an exception to that rule. Therefore, what are you defining as life outside of that? Energy? Spirit? Soul? Consciousness?

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:47 PM

Your second point is not reasonable because you may never exist again.

In fact, permanent non-existence would be the highest probability based upon the absence of our observation of things coming from nothing.

The laws of Thermodynamics make the assumption that things can change form, but not arise from nothing or disappear into nothing. These laws are based upon observed reality and are called laws because no exceptions have been observed.

edit on 16/3/2016 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:59 PM

My proof is countless conversations during lucid dreams with the dead, i suppose.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:14 PM
Well, I don't know how anyone can bring proof for others. I say this having died twice. I actually had the state police call not fire rescue, but for body bags. Fire rescue advanced life support came out a a matter of policy. I was dead, but I was brought back. However, when I was dead I had an incredible experience that convinced me beyond any doubt you continue to live. What amazes me is the people that claim absolutes have had no experience at all with physical body death.

There is an energy that flows through everything in the universe. Scientists have supposedly been able to detect this in the recent years. I won't go looking for a link, I will tell you my experience. I left my body and contrary too many stories of death was instantly out in space. I do believe people have experienced physical death, brain dying, and had experiences that scientists rightly claim is from the brain dying. But, there is actual death when you are past that.

I was in a position between the Sun and Earth because I could see the Earth and Moon off to my right and Sun off to my left. I have to use an analogy here because words just can't describe it. It was as if you were in a pitch black room and there is a fish tank full of life and objects in the room also dark. Then the tank light comes on and you become aware of everything in it at once. That is what happened with the universe. I became aware of everything. I could see moons behind planets, things I never knew existed and verified when back alive and it confirmed it for me. I was part of the ALL. I was connected to ALL in existence. I will leave it to people to determine what they believe of my experiences, but you may say God, or a Universal consciousness, or whatever.

What happened next is what was the connection to my consciousness with this universal consciousness. It was as if I was hit in the high forehead with a super amount of energy. It wasn't just energy, it was knowledge, data streaming in as such a great magnitude that I can't even quantify it. It was like downloading all the data and knowledge in human history every second. As one poster said, you can neither create energy nor destroy it, only transform it. The 'you', your being or consciousness goes on. It is pure love, pure comfort. You have no pain, no hunger, no being hot nor cold. It is like being perfect. It was a place I never wanted to come back from. I learned things I had not known before. I happen to believe people like Einstein or people that come up with impossible new theories or whatever through dreams, voices, etc. are somehow accessing this universal consciousness.

I was told to go back as I had things I had to do here before it was time for me to be able to stay or go elsewhere. I was quite aware that my body had been back on the planet dead and it sort of freaked me out a little. It was when I was thinking about this that I was suddenly snatched back into it.

During one of my deaths, the doctors working on my body had put me on life support and told my family brain scans showed almost nothing. I was probably brain dead and they had to make a choice as to what to do. To discontinue life support and whether I was an organ donor. They told them even if I somehow lived I would not be able to do anything, feed myself, or be aware of my surroundings. It was about then I came awake and am strong enough that I broke one of the straps they had me tied down with and pulled the respirator hose out and threw it on the floor. I was awake like I was every day. It shocked the doctors and everyone. They said they couldn't believe I was awake and talking and normal acting. Well, except I was telling them about not dying. They said people don't come awake off life support like that. If they do, they come back slowly.

These doctors would come in every day and ask me about my experiences. I could tell they were fascinated as they were freaked out because of what they told the family. It made them unsure now of being so sure people were truly brain dead and not able to live off life support. Their teaching and experience told them otherwise which disturbed them. The fact this happened twice in my life is what makes it beyond proof for me. I only tell you this story because I know so many people come in these threads with absolutes, telling people they die and that's it, nothing else. I think that is very sad for them to believe that, It must suck going through life thinking that it is all for naught. It is also because the people that believe them may never develop their consciousness and spirituality and be prepared to handle what is coming. As for those that are dead set in their belief, I have no problem as I know they will find out soon enough for themselves. I think they may have much harder of a time transitioning, perhaps not ready spiritually for the reality of eternal life.

So, prepare yourselves and act accordingly. May you all be blessed with true revelation and understanding and be ready for your future. It is not all for naught.

edit on 16/3/16 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:21 PM

Science says that everything is energy, from the matter that makes up our world to the stuff that makes up our minds. Thoughts are nothing more than synapses firing in the brain, a.k.a. energy being released in the form of electrical charges. Our awareness is a product of these synapses being firing meaning awareness is the product of energy.

It's not speculation, it's science. Research it.
edit on 3/16/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:37 PM

originally posted by: reddragon2015
I'll try to keep as concise as possible. I've meditate over this concept for a while now and not too long ago I've came to one conclusion: Life is eternal.

First of all, you haven't defined exactly what you are referring to with the term "life"'.

Are you referring to organic things that perform particular 'life defining' functions, such as adaptation, metabolism, and some mode of reproduction? Or are you referring to 'life' as encompassing organisms such as viruses or bacteria, that may not necessarily fit with these functions?

Where is the boundary between life and non-life, in the context of what you are claiming is eternal?

Are you using NASA's definition of life, which is "A self-sustained chemical system capable of undergoing Darwinian evolution"?

Are you inventing your own metaphysical definition of "life" to suit your own predetermined conclusion? Please explain yourself.

Here is why. Lets look at two possibilities.

1) Life is eternal... so there is no beginning or end. It is a constant.

Again, it is ambiguous as to what exactly you are saying is eternal and has no beginning or end. Are you asserting that life in some form or another has always existed, and there was never a time when life did not exist?

Pretty bold assertion if so, I should like to read your logical deduction behind this.

Are you stating that life exists independent of time and space? This would require life to have no material dependence, which is contrary to observation, however you define 'life'..

Are you saying that when something dies, it continues to live, and the death is merely a highly convincing illusion?

It feels like your assertions rely on a kind of dualistic philosophy regarding life and matter, which is in itself illogical.

2) Life is not eternal, but starts and end. For this to be true, that means we came into existent from nothing. So we became something from nothing. And if this is true, then that mean it can happen again.

This a straw man, and reads like an imitation of the cosmological argument..

The only thing that is implied by life having a beginning and end, is that life has a beginning and an end.. You might infer that life originally arose from non-life, or that life in general is a naturally emergent feature of matter, but not without first defining what you mean by "life" in the first place..

Individual lives certainly have definable beginnings and ends. There is absolutely a distinguishing point at which something living becomes something non-living, and biological processes cease, so how is this explained if life never ends?

Thus meaning, maybe 100 millions more year after you die, the same you might be birth again. So life isn't eternal but splotchy. Meaning there are gaps. But gaps are just time and when we don't exists, we do not know the concept of time. So, to ourselves, we are rebirth instantaneously, thus it is still eternal. Birth, life, death, birth again.

Your description of reincarnation here says very little about life. Rather, it appears you are talking about an individual's "soul" or "spirit" that experiences sequential periods of life, with "gaps" of non-life in between..

Anyways, I hope that made sense. Maybe I can reword it different or better but that is the jist of it.

I'm afraid it didn't make much logical sense at all. Please try rewriting your assertions more clearly and defining your terms properly.

Edit: For those who ask for where is the proof? How do I prove to you that the sun exists other than the fact that you stare up to the sky and see it for yourself. To see the proof, one must look for themselves.

If your title infers that you will be providing proof, whether observational, experimental, mathematical or logical, you really should actually present some. You may not defer your burden of proof to us.

Those who do not take their own obligation to the burden of proof seriously do not deserve to have their claims taken seriously.

You could easily prove the sun exists without requiring us to see it; do you think blind people don't believe in the sun? Your attempt to deflect backing up your claim with substance make me wonder just how strong and informed your conviction actually is..
edit on 16-3-2016 by spygeek because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:56 PM

How exactly does that constitute proof? *Shakes head* Proof is not something which is subjective. It either is or it is not. Or are we speaking about different concepts using the same language? You seem to be speaking of "gnosis" unverifiable at that

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 11:09 AM

Even if life is not eternal, that doesn't mean that life came from nothing. That's terrible rationalization for your "proof" that life is eternal. You created a false idea to shut down the notion that life might not be eternal, kind of a straw man, no?

Edit: For those who ask for where is the proof? How do I prove to you that the sun exists other than the fact that you stare up to the sky and see it for yourself. To see the proof, one must look for themselves.

Seriously?

Where can I look to see that life is eternal? I swear people just don't understand what the word "proof" means. You speculating and giving your opinion is not proof of anything.

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 12:38 PM
Life is not eternal Soul is

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 12:45 PM
Time is definitely an illusion.
The only existence we have is now, which is a mixture of perception and "stuff."
But we know that perception relies on a body that can perceive, and that body will fail.
Once the body fails, existence will vanish.
The paradox is that "now" is not "eternity."

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:10 PM

originally posted by: reddragon2015

Edit: For those who ask for where is the proof? How do I prove to you that the sun exists other than the fact that you stare up to the sky and see it for yourself. To see the proof, one must look for themselves.

The proof can be experiential, yes, and that indeed is the best kind of proof.

But, the proof can also be a logical proof. And that, is where materialists get their undies in a bunch and start foaming at the mouth demanding measurements and research papers and the like that wouldnt prove anything anyway, or start becoming deliberately obtuse and pretending they dont understand whats being said.

Its kind of funny. They become the religionists they hate so much who will not consider reason and adhere feverishly to their dogmas.

-

If we assume that there was once nothing, and then something, and we have an infinite amount of time to work with (which are their assumptions), then it is self-evident that the state of "nothingness" is an unstable one that cannot be eternal. There was once nothingness, then, something. Thus nothingness is in fact limited in its ability to maintain its own state, and cannot do so indefinitely.

If the above is true, its likely that somethingness is also unstable and cannot persist forever, because moving from an unstable state to one of permanent stability makes no sense, because a permanently stable state would need to always have existed, and never have had a beginning, otherwise its stability as permanent is strongly called into question. This is easy to recognize by thinking of time as a spatial dimension (which it actually is) rather than a special "time" dimension, and recognizing that a stable structure does not change its shape over any dimension if its truly stable. Thus if it had ever not been in its current form, including in time, then it would be inherently unstable.

An easier way to put that would be "if it began, it must end". Only those things without beginnings can be eternal, because they have the unchanging stability throughout all dimensions to have always been, thus shall ever be.

Thus the states of nothingness, and somethingness, are unstable, and indefinite in time. It could be that they oscillate between one another, like a waveform.

But their individual permanence is consequently a moot point.

The above refutes completely the materialists stances of an eternal dark oblivion after death, of either the individual, or the universe as a whole. If there is a true state of nothingness, its cannot be permanent, and always ends itself someway, somehow. So the claim for what happens after you or the universe dies of: "Nothing, forever" is an irrational assertion of dogma rather than a logical conclusion.

And they hate it. Its like trying to talk to a fundy xtian about if Jesus actually existed or not. It goes against their dogma. It becomes an ego issue because they would have to admit to being incorrect in their assumptions, rather than an issue of whats true or not.

Logic is our guide to truth. Not dogma, either scientific, or religious.

edit on 3/17/2016 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

10