I have been browsing this forum and decided to join. I wanted to share my understanding of rebirth and see if anyone who opposes it can counter this. Alright I think we can all agree that consciousness or what we may call the mindstream, like all things, is dependently arisen and impermanent. Being so, it does not have a fixed being/identity/"thingness." It is not truly existent. This is part of emptiness. Now, there being no thing (existence) there to begin with, how could there be the absence of a thing, non existence? Just so, there being no consciousness present as a true existent thing to begin with, how could there possibly be absence of that thing? Now it is this dependently arisen and impermanent consciousness itself (not "self" but you know what I mean) that is not existent and thus cannot be non existent. So one can say that dependently arisen and impermanent phenomena themselves are emptiness.
There is no emptiness apart from phenomena. Thus emptiness is not existence (what we may call eternalism) and is not non existence (nihilism or annihilationism). To claim that consciousness ended at death would be to believe that there was something substantial there that could end in the first place. Therefore, the very view that, because apart from changing phenomena there is no emptiness the CONTINUITY of this mindstream as dependently arisen and always changing IS emptiness, IS itself the middle way - it avoids existence and non existence, nothingness, annhiliation, etc. If one believes that the stream of mind can end after death, I believe that one does not yet have right view of emptiness. I would in fact say that correct understanding of emptiness includes understanding rebirth as literal. I would very much like to hear refutations from rebirth deniers on this topic.