SoulPancake

False.

Life is eternal. We were never "born," and we cannot ever "die."

Even our bodies do not "die." Their material form simply ceases to hold its cohesion once our life energy shifts its focus from the physical realm to the spiritual. The atoms and molecules which bonded together to form our body simply return to the elements from whence they came.

You ask "is this all there is?" only because you only believe in the existence that you perceive through your five physical senses. You ask if there's a point, and yet the fact that you can even ponder your own existence in your consciousness should tell you the answer you seek. YES! The point of all "this" is so that Consciousness CAN KNOW ITSELF.

The "native" realm of Consciousness is in the Subjective, the Absolute, the Oneness. Imagine yourself becoming self-aware in darkness; no windows or doors, not even any light with which to see the room, or to help you to see your own body, or in fact, if you even possess a body at all. For all you know, you may be nothing more than pure mind energy. In fact, there's not even a floor or ceiling, and you simply seem to be floating in a black void that could be either infinitely vast, or as tight as a cocoon. Other than your own thoughts and awareness, there seems to be absolutely nothing "other" than yourself to even be aware of.

You long to know exactly "what" you are, but there's nobody else around to describe you from another point of view. YOU are the ONLY point of view that exists, period. No matter how long you search or listen or try to sense any "others," you simply seem to know that you are the only "awareness" that there is. You also KNOW that you're a pretty amazing being, but you've been around so very long, that you only understand this in CONCEPT, and not in CONTEXT, and without context, there cannot possibly ever be true understanding of how utterly awesome a being you are.

Your only solution, therefore, is to create context within which you might be able to contrast yourself. Only problem is that, although you KNOW yourself to be a master Creator, there's nothing else in all of Existence to create anything out of. And even you are subject to the laws of mathematics, and those laws say you cannot produce something out of absolute nothing.

But there isn't "absolute" nothing. There's YOU. In fact, YOU are All That Is, and All That Is, absent space-time, is INFINITE in scope. So you realize that while you cannot create anything that is truly separate from yourself, you CAN reshape, reform, and divide yourself in Infinite ways, which begin to give you the ILLUSION of "otherness."

So you set about the task of reshaping part of yourself into physical matter, and another part of yourself into spiritual energies. You send all the physical matter flying in every direction in order to create space-time, relativity, and Duality. Within the spiritual realm, you divide your Conscious mind into infinite copies of yourself, and you call them "Souls." Each of these souls shares the same Consciousness as you do, but from separate PERSPECTIVES. Each of them also shares your same longing to EXPERIENCE their magnificence from a contextual perspective.

So you give each soul the power to FORGET Its True Identity, and to insert themselves within physical vessels, or bodies, so that they can experience what it truly means to BE GOD through living out infinite varieties of lives within the illusory space-time Universe believing that they are NOT GOD.

And over the ages and hundreds, perhaps even thousands of lifetimes lived within their illusory separation from God, each soul slowly remembers Who They Really Are, and begins to create and re-create themselves over and over again, in infinite ways, AS GOD.

Existence is, in essence, a never-ending game of Creation in which the One and Only Cosmic Consciousness Creates and Re-Creates Himself anew in an Eternal Moment of Now. ~ Crag

we are born, we live, we die?
hmmmmm speak for yourself

I find that curiosity about what's going to happen next -- here and now (or tomorrow or over there) -- is sufficient reason to live without believing in heaven and hell as metaphysical or even metaphorical locations.

Life, right now, is riveting. Sometimes boring, sometimes exhilarating. If I thought there was an afterlife, why... I might squander the life I have now, banking on "getting it right" next time. I don't know if there's an afterlife or if there was a beforelife; I do know I'm alive right now, and I intend to enjoy it. Or mess it up.

Sweep up. Try again.

Until I die.

I don't know what reason "we" have to have, but for me, this is plenty. I am rich with reason!

Existentialism at its finest! What a sad way to live. Humans need, even thrive on the idea that there is somewhere or something better coming after this life. Most religions teach that there is, in fact, an afterlife/world. I know some people will disagree with me on this, but I truly believe there is a heaven and a hell. I do not think it is even remotely possible for this little planet to be all there is. That idea is what keeps me holding on here on earth. If there is nothing else to live for and look forward to, what reason do we have to live?

There are some folks who get out of trouble or end their bad habits or learn from their mistakes just because it is in their own self-interest to live cleaner, smarter lives -- and they do it without religion or god.

"We live" is the part I'm interested in. It's the only point in the story where we have any freedom.

@FailuresArt "I'm interested in what assumptions you think I have"

Here's one:-

"searching, not only for the know, but reinvestigating what we've already learned with better tools. Religion does not do this." (Simply too sweeping to be true)

or:-

"Telling someone they are leaving a conversation is unessesary, and I suspect in most situations is more of a play for control over a discussion. I.e. - I'll just take my ball and go home." (Telling someone this is a signal only of this. The rest is you)

or:-

"If people cannot handle a sober discussion where they must defend their beliefs, then it's not my fault." (All their fault then is it? Must be their berating tone)

and:-

"If people want to get mad because I reject their idea or because I ask for proof, it's really not my problem to address." (i feel it may be, in part, at least)

@TutherBrother The benefit of science is that is in a constantly state of searching, not only for the know, but reinvestigating what we've already learned with better tools. Religion does not do this.

I'm interested in what assumptions you think I have and for that matter how those assumptions you think I have are false.

As for absent people, plenty of people claim to be absent. I've seen that more than once. No issue if she does not wish to respond, but it's not a priori to comment on things directed at me. Telling someone they are leaving a conversation is unessesary, and I suspect in most situations is more of a play for control over a discussion. I.e. - I'll just take my ball and go home.

I don't understand how my approach is any more "intrinsically hostile" than any person of faith making declarations of fact that I'm supposed to accept without proof. If people cannot handle a sober discussion where they must defend their beliefs, then it's not my fault. Getting defensive is counterproductive.

I force nobody to have any conversation. If people want to get mad because I reject their idea or because I ask for proof, it's really not my problem to address. I don't expect others to take science and logic more serious than their faith, and I'm not here to change anyone's mind.

@FailuresArt About the axis on which the person told you that they had left the conversation. Assuming that you read this, you must be aware that you were replying, effectively, to yourself. a priori assumtions, such as "god is unprovable, therefore dismissible" or, " If a thought cannot be communicated in logic, it is not logical.", have led you to call out after an absent person, which is very zen, but not very logical. i have absolutely no issue with this, of course, we are human, all our thoughts weigh exactly the same, whether they are logical or illogical. Your approach is intrinsically hostile because of your assumptions, my lovely friend. i believe that the first assumtion i mention may be in danger of making your scientific methodology lean to one side, in an alarmlingly unscientific way. :-}

@TutherBrother about what axis, my compatriot?

@FailuresArt " If you find, you typically quit searching."

Hhmmm. Mirror this, if you will.