Do souls exist prior to conception?

[Oliver_Clark]

What exactly was the teaching of Origen in the C3rd AD on pre-existence?

Was this teaching of Origen declared anathema at Church Councils in Constantinople between 540 AD and 580 AD?

If so, did the Pope at the time agree with such a declaration?

If the Pope did not agree, was this because the purpose of this decision by one or both of these Councils was to maintain control by the state and the church of providing education in sexuality and true love that Catholic Church teaching now states: For education …[in sexuality and truelove] to correspond to the objective needs of true love, parents should provide this education within their own autonomous responsibility": “…Within the Family” (“The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality: Guidelines for Education Within the Family” [TTMHS], 1995, 24).

 

[John_Calvin]

Since God knew us before conception, it could be argued the soul exists before conception. The term “know” or “knew” in the Old Testament is pretty serious (often even used to imply intercourse, as in “adam KNEW eve”). Since all existence is from God’s will anyway, for God to know our soul from the beginning implies a level of existence, whatever that may be. Just a thought anyway.

This argument holds no water. The entire concept of prophetic activity rests upon God’s knowledge of that which is yet to occur. Indeed, it goes so far as to intend that God actively determines that which will occur. One cannot maintain that the spirit of events existed before the world was created. This is true, e.g. of the death of Christ.

17 If you invoke as Father the one who judges all people impartially according to their deeds, live in reverent fear during the time of your exile. 18 You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without defect or blemish. 20 He was destined before the foundation of the world, but was revealed at the end of the ages for your sake. 21 Through him you have come to trust in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are set on God.

The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version. 1989 (1 Pe 1:17-21). Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

These back-and-forth notions of pre-existance is flirting with heresy.

 

[Yaholo]

This argument holds no water.

It is just a thought, not an argument. It seems pointless to search for absolutes in the unknown.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

THE ANATHEMAS AGAINST ORIGEN.

IF anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema.

fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const2.html

Main arguments for traducianism
Supporters of traducianism present arguments from the Bible such as the following:

Semitic Totality Concept: the Bible teaches that the body (the material aspect of man) and soul are a unity. Therefore then the body and soul of the individual must begin simultaneously.
Begetting includes the image and likeness of God (Genesis 5:3), but since God is spirit, this must mean the immaterial aspect of man.

God’s creation is finished (Genesis 2:2), thus no new souls are created directly, but are instead transmitted by natural generation just as the body is.

God created all things “very good” (Genesis 1:31), yet many Christians understand the Bible to teach that after the fall, all are sinful at birth (Job 14:1-4; 15:14; Psalm 58:3; John 3:6) and from conception (Psalm 51:5). Since most theologians hold that God would not have created something sinful, it follows that souls are not created directly but are generated.

Genesis 46:26 can be understood to teach that souls are already present in the loins, and Hebrews 7:10 (“When Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.”) seems to take this view.

In Genesis 6, some interpreters see the traducian model as the best explanation for the begetting of monstrous offspring with human bodies and demonic souls by the angels that took wives of the daughters of men. The soul-creationist’s difficulty of God creating souls for such monsters may be why most later churchmen rejected the literal interpretation of Genesis 6 as referring to angels interbreeding with human women.
Traducianism also provides an explanation for the means by which Jesus can be the literal offspring of Mary after the virgin birth of Jesus and yet be without sin — namely, the Holy Spirit created the paternal spiritual and physical elements of his human nature, and through these Jesus was conceived of Mary’s ovum.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traducianism

newadvent.org/cathen/15014a.htm
trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=56

(Heb. 11:3) 1. Origin of the Soul. Traducian view: that the human race was immediately (or originally) created in Adam–all souls since Adam being only mediately (or instrumentally) created by God through the parents (Gen. 1:27, 22, 28). The word traducian comes from the Latin tradux, meaning “branch of a vine.” Thus, each new human is a branch of his/her parents. Biblical evidences for Traducianism are as follows:

a. From the beginning, male and female were considered one species, two sharing human life (Gen. 1:26).

b. Both male and female, not just male, were broadly called “Adam” (5:1-2).

c. Eve was made from Adam. not separately (2:21-22).

d. Creation was complete from the beginning (2:1-3), and God has rested from creating ever since (Heb. 4:4; cf. Matt. 13:35; Deut. 4:32). God can create only perfection but souls are imperfect from the moment of human conception. This is why some believe that all souls were somehow in Adam before he sinned.

e. The Bible speaks of the unity of male and female (I Cor. 11:8) one coming from the other.

f. Eve is called “the mother of all living” (Gen. 3:20), a title most appropriate if all other human life came from her.

g. Adam had children in his image (5:3; cf. 1:26), which makes sense if his life was truly transmitted to them by natural generation.

h. Flesh (Gk: sarx) can mean “whole person with body” (John 3:6; cf. 1:14) rather than just the transmission of a physical body.

i. Likewise, in Rom. 1:3, flesh, which comes from physical generation, refers to one’s whole humanity, not just to the body.

j. Acts 17:26 KJV says that all who are God’s offspring (image) are made of “one blood,” which is accomplished by natural processes.

k. Hebrew 7:10 teaches that Levi was in Abraham’s loins and came by physical transmission from him.

a. Mental Likeness: intelligence (Gen. 1:28; Acts 26:24-27; Acts 17:10-12: Rom. 1:18-21, 28).

b. Moral Likeness: (Rom. 2:14).

c. Social Likeness: Created to have fellowship with God. (Gen. 5:22,24) “Enoch walked with God”. (Gen. 6:9) “Noah walked with God”. (Lev. 26:12) “And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.”

B. The Fall of Man…due to Satanic influence. (Gen 3:4-7) “You will not die…you will be like God…knowing good and evil. (Gen. 2:17) You must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die. (Gen 3:1) …Did God really say, “you must not eat from any tree in the garden”?

72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:mQHaj5ECPbgJ:www.napierchurch.org/pdf/articles/bds.pdf+Traducianism+Bible&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us

 

[Yaholo]

Daniel Marsh - Awesome resources! Thanks so much!

I don’t about Traducianism as a whole, but I certainly think it is important to realize how much of who we are comes from our parents.

 

[tayloresque]

Maybe, Chist himself should answer these questions - if there is an adoration chapel in the area then you may go to be with him, and receive your answers and the solace you seek 24x7. I like to start with a thank you, and go even when I have need of nothing - to express to the lord my gratitude for his sacrifice, and hope that my feeble attempts to comfort him may be pleasing to him, much like a small child trying diligently to assist a hurt adult.

Yes! What a wonderful idea! It’s been years since I’ve signed up to be one of the adorers. Thank you for reminding me!

Many blessings to you all!

 

[RobbyS]

Hi!

I think the biblical foundation of this truth is from the very name of God: I Am. May be there are others more referances.

God is not I was. Or I will be.
This confusion causes as to mistake ‘eternity’ for past. I understand ‘eternity’ to be sort of perpetual ‘present’. Since a soul is eternal. It can not have been created in past because it would not have an other ‘time’ vehicle while waiting for the human body. We are in time by the means of our bodies which are like ‘time’ vehicles’. So a soul without a time vehicle is in God in eternity, perpetual present and can only come in time from eternity (perpetual present in God) at the moment of the formation of the human body.

It is God being always in the present which makes him create a soul (eternal creature) directly at the moment of conception. God being only in the present can only create in the present.

When we say that God have always existed, it is meant that he is beyond time, not that he in some distant past which we can somehow count.

I think the moment of conception is special connection between ‘time’ and ‘eternity’. A soul which has always been in God is sent in ‘time’, or created.

So a soul before creation is not in ‘old earth age’ but in God.

Are you sure that you are not influenced by Platonic notions of the soul? My understanding that human beings are created in time and space and are part of the general creation. He creates persons, who are a composite of body and soul. St Thomas, I think, taught that “ensoulment” began with the quckening, which was many weeks long in human development, that is when the baby bgan to show signgs of life by “moving.” I think he would have a different view if he had known the basic facts of human conception.

 

[Oliver_Clark]

Job’s Trust is my name for any: “…parents …associating together …[to] put into action an educational project…” (TTMHS, 1995, 24).

Parents are so directed by the Church in this document, “The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality: Guidelines for Education Within the Family”, prepared by the Pontifical Council for the Family: “…to guide all parents, and those who may assist them”, which states that: “…based on the teaching of the church and with her suppport, parents must reclaim their own task in education …[in] sexuality and true love.” (Ibid)

Assuming the pre-existence of souls, does the preconceived soul invite a man and a woman to accept the gift of this pre-existent soul as a person to meet the need of:

(a) Each parent individually;
(b) The couple in their placing the material of the egg and the sperm together;
(c) The family of these parents including any already conceived children?

My particular interest is in my roles in education as both a Catholic School religion teacher in the Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane, Australia, from 1985-91, and as a married Catholic parent.

My Christian callings are in the “Work of Mary” (Focolare Movement) both as a married focolarino to keep spiritual unity with consecrated celibates, and as a Volunteer in collaborating in the ‘Building of a New Humanity in the World of Education’.

I seek both in obedience to written directions of me by my church superiors, and in following, to the extent it is consistent with my own conscience, their written counsel, to ensure the carrying out of the “differentiated but shared responsibility” (Catechesi Tradendae, 1979, 16) of all members of the Church and of society to ensure the faith education, or the catechesis, in sexuality and true love (including other sacramental education) within the family in accordance with the teaching of the Church, so that it is then possible for all to provide this education within the family within their own autonomous responsibilities. That is, ensuring is inseparable from providing.

I understand the need to restate church teaching in Sacra Virginitas, 1954, 24 that: “Holy virginity surpasses marriage in excellence” in light of both Humanae Vitae, 1968 and the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church: “On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in Society”, from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, signed by the Prefect, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, issued on the Feast of the Visitation, 31st May, 2004, which states in conclusion: “The Church is certainly aware of the power of evil at work in individuals and in societies, which at times almost leads one to despair of the goodness of married couples.”

It is part of my Christian calling as a married focolarino to keep such spiritual unity with consecrated celibates, especially the Bishops and Leaders of Religious Instiutes. The hoped for fruit of this unity will be that these church leaders are able then to understand that as pre-conceived souls they were invited by their parents to accept the gift of both their parents as both individual persons, and as a couple, and the family of their parents as persons. Hence these church leaders can come to understand that in keeping the inseparability of gift and need, they can see the need for a development of church teaching that:

“Connected to incest is any sexual abuse perpetrated by adults on children or adolescents entrusted to their care” (CCC 2389).

I judge, based on my own belief in pre-existence, that there was no action of the child or adolescent being “entrusted”, but rather I judge that what occurred was the reciprocal actions beginning at the state of pre-conception of both inviting others to accept the gift of oneself in order to meet the needs of the others, and accepting the gift of a person, or persons, in order to meet one’s own need.

Job’s Trust holds that “Trust” is the inseparability of one’s own honesty about one’s own needs and one’s acceptance of others in their needs as inseparably conected by 'Gift" of each to the other. This we see as ‘the dance of love in the Trinty’.

As a parent in Job’s Trust, I hold that Origen’s insight as to pre-existence, and hence by extension to the reciprocity in the relationship between the family and the consecrated celibates in making a gift of each other to meet the others’ need, is supported in Scripture by the purpose for which Christ, as reported, “made a whip of cords” (Jn 2:15).

It is my experience that most members of the Catholic Church as a group affected by offences" “Connected to incest…” (CCC 2389) are complicit with most of those responsible for the Church’s ministry in ignoring “…that forms of renewal inspired and sustained by the Spirit rarely derive their initial impulse from the Church herself.” (Archbishop Paul Cordes as Vice President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, Charisms and new evangelization, St Paul,1992, 158)

My wife and I have found by insiting on our “authorization…to a certain degree” as parents for any others to be able to carry out their responsibilities in the process of education, forty complainants of sexual abuse as young persons by twenty Catholic Church personnel of the Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane, including the former Archbishop of Brisbane, Archbishop Sir James Duhig.

My final question is: Are local Synods of the Laity being held before Local Synods of the Family, especially given that the Vatican Synod for the Family in about 1978 was held before the Vatican Synod for the Laity in 1988, and if so, is this because of widespread local dissent to Humanae Vitae, 1968?

best wishes,
Oliver Clark,
Job’s Trust

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I had here or read something about when the chamber of souls is empty many years ago. I started reading this thread about 2 hours ago and am just now ready to make a comment from what i can find on line there is a teaching in Jewish mysticism and ins the Talmud regarding the well of souls a that the messiah will not come until the last soul has been born.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

I had here or read something about when the chamber of souls is empty many years ago. I started reading this thread about 2 hours ago and am just now ready to make a comment from what i can find on line there is a teaching in Jewish mysticism and ins the Talmud regarding the well of souls a that the messiah will not come until the last soul has been born.

The Talmud is NOT the Torah.

 

[Hastrman]

The Talmud is NOT the Torah.

Don’t think there’s any metempsychosis (that’s the twenty-dollar word for preexistence/transmigration of souls) in the Talmud.

There is in Kabbalah’s book, the Zohar (maybe), but not all Jews accept the Zohar, and of those who do, every rabbi’s got a different interpretation.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Don’t think there’s any metempsychosis (that’s the twenty-dollar word for preexistence/transmigration of souls) in the Talmud.

There is in Kabbalah’s book, the Zohar (maybe), but not all Jews accept the Zohar, and of those who do, every rabbi’s got a different interpretation.

I think you meant to send this quote to the poster just above me.

 

[Memaw]

My brother-in-law doesn’t go to church, but he watches/listens to a preacher on tv - I think Shepherd’s Chapel (Arnold Murray). Anyway, my brother-in-law says that it’s inferred between the first two verses in Genesis. That’s where he got the first earth age and the 2nd earth age. Anyway, he said that God created a set number of souls in the first earth age but the first earth age was destroyed (hence the vast wasteland in Genesis). These souls are given a second chance in this present earth age. So when a baby is born, it has the soul of that of the soul that was present in the first earth age. It’s a crazy idea, and I so want to refute it. Thanks for your help.

Many blessings!

Taylor

Thats what I call “reading between the lines” to the enth degree!!!
Never heard of such a thing. Some people really do have vivid imaginations.

 

[Valke2]

Don’t think there’s any metempsychosis (that’s the twenty-dollar word for preexistence/transmigration of souls) in the Talmud.

There is in Kabbalah’s book, the Zohar (maybe), but not all Jews accept the Zohar, and of those who do, every rabbi’s got a different interpretation.

That certain souls can move from one body to another several times, is mentioned in the earliest work of Kabbalah, the Sefer HaBahir. This believe eventually evolved/merged into the belief of maligant souls that take over someone’s body.

 

[geraldffff]

Since God knew us before conception, it could be argued the soul exists before conception. The term “know” or “knew” in the Old Testament is pretty serious (often even used to imply intercourse, as in “adam KNEW eve”). Since all existence is from God’s will anyway, for God to know our soul from the beginning implies a level of existence, whatever that may be. Just a thought anyway.

I think the passage indicated dose not defiantly say God knew us before conception but that God knew us before we were formed. God is timeless a year to him could be a millisecond or less. At conception we are not formed but are two distinct cells from two different persons. So to me the passage means God knew us at the moment of conception. A more relevant question for those who see Jesus as the alpha and the omega might be when God came to know the man Jesus. It also makes come to mind question what the angel was telling Mary at the moment she at the moment Jesus the man came in to being.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

The Talmud is NOT the Torah.

never said it was

 

[geraldffff]

Since God knew us before conception, it could be argued the soul exists before conception. The term “know” or “knew” in the Old Testament is pretty serious (often even used to imply intercourse, as in “adam KNEW eve”). Since all existence is from God’s will anyway, for God to know our soul from the beginning implies a level of existence, whatever that may be. Just a thought anyway.

As regards the time when the individual soul is created, philosophical speculation varies. The ancient Platonic doctrine of the pre-natal existence of souls and their subsequent incarceration in bodies may be passed over as poetic fiction and not scientific theory. The same may be said of the ancient hypothesis of transmigration, which, however, still survives in Buddhism and is revived by recent Theosophy. Besides being entirely gratuitous, metempsychosis rests on a false view which conceives of body and soul as only accidentally, not essentially, combined in the unity of the human person. The traditional philosophy of the Church holds that the rational soul is created at the moment when it is infused into the new organism. www.newadvent.org/cathen/04475a.htm

Leo IX (1050), in the symbol presented to the Bishop Peter for subscription, lays down: “I believe and profess that the soul is not a part of God, but is created out of nothing, and that, without baptism, it is in original sin” (Denzinger, Enchir., n. 296). That the soul sinned in its pre-existent state, and on that account was incarcerated in the body, is a fiction which has been repeatedly condemned by the Church. Divested of this fiction, the theory that the soul exists prior to its infusion into the organism, while not explicitly reprobated, is obviously opposed to the doctrine of the Church, according to which souls are multiplied correspondingly with the multiplication of human organisms (Conc. Lat. V, in Denzinger, op. cit., 621). But whether the rational soul is infused into the organism at conception, as the modern opinion holds, or some weeks subsequently, as the Scholastics suppose (St. Thomas, Q. i a. 2, ad 2), is an open question with theologians (Kleutgen, Phil. d. Vorzeit, II, 657).

I’ll trust what the Catholic Churches teaching on this. There are a lot of confused people out there and I do not want to join them just because of their unique interpretation of what the Bible may say.

 

[Memaw]

As regards the time when the individual soul is created, philosophical speculation varies. The ancient Platonic doctrine of the pre-natal existence of souls and their subsequent incarceration in bodies may be passed over as poetic fiction and not scientific theory. The same may be said of the ancient hypothesis of transmigration, which, however, still survives in Buddhism and is revived by recent Theosophy. Besides being entirely gratuitous, metempsychosis rests on a false view which conceives of body and soul as only accidentally, not essentially, combined in the unity of the human person. The traditional philosophy of the Church holds that the rational soul is created at the moment when it is infused into the new organism. www.newadvent.org/cathen/04475a.htm

Leo IX (1050), in the symbol presented to the Bishop Peter for subscription, lays down: “I believe and profess that the soul is not a part of God, but is created out of nothing, and that, without baptism, it is in original sin” (Denzinger, Enchir., n. 296). That the soul sinned in its pre-existent state, and on that account was incarcerated in the body, is a fiction which has been repeatedly condemned by the Church. Divested of this fiction, the theory that the soul exists prior to its infusion into the organism, while not explicitly reprobated, is obviously opposed to the doctrine of the Church, according to which souls are multiplied correspondingly with the multiplication of human organisms (Conc. Lat. V, in Denzinger, op. cit., 621). But whether the rational soul is infused into the organism at conception, as the modern opinion holds, or some weeks subsequently, as the Scholastics suppose (St. Thomas, Q. i a. 2, ad 2), is an open question with theologians (Kleutgen, Phil. d. Vorzeit, II, 657).

I’ll trust what the Catholic Churches teaching on this. There are a lot of confused people out there and I do not want to join them just because of their unique interpretation of what the Bible may say.

God KNOWS everything, now anyone can try to figure out just how that all works together with creation and free will and we’ll both know more than we did before. I will follow the Church and be at peace.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

christianhistory.wordpress.com/600/
newadvent.org/cathen/15427b.htm
newadvent.org/cathen/04308b.htm

Isaiah 29:16 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)

You have turned things around,
as if the potter were the same as the clay.
How can what is made say about its maker,
“He didn’t make me”?
How can what is formed
say about the one who formed it,
“He doesn’t understand [what he’s doing]”?

Isaiah 64:8 (New International Version)

8 Yet, O LORD, you are our Father.
We are the clay, you are the potter;
we are all the work of your hand.

Romans 9:19-27 (New Century Version)

19 So one of you will ask me: "Then why does God blame us for our sins? Who can fight his will?"20 You are only human, and human beings have no right to question God. An object should not ask the person who made it, "Why did you make me like this?"21 The potter can make anything he wants to make. He can use the same clay to make one thing for special use and another thing for daily use.

22 It is the same way with God. He wanted to show his anger and to let people see his power. But he patiently stayed with those people he was angry with—people who were made ready to be destroyed.23 He waited with patience so that he could make known his rich glory to the people who receive his mercy. He has prepared these people to have his glory,24 and we are those people whom God called. He called us not from the Jews only but also from those who are not Jews. 25 As the Scripture says in Hosea:
“I will say, ‘You are my people’
to those I had called ‘not my people.’
And I will show my love
to those people I did not love.” — Hosea 2:1, 23
26 "They were called,
‘You are not my people,’
but later they will be called
‘children of the living God.’ " — Hosea 1:10

27 And Isaiah cries out about Israel:
"The people of Israel are many,
like the grains of sand by the sea.
But only a few of them will be saved,

Jeremiah 18

1 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD : 2 “Go down to the potter’s house, and there I will give you my message.” 3 So I went down to the potter’s house, and I saw him working at the wheel. 4 But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.
5 Then the word of the LORD came to me: 6 “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter does?” declares the LORD. "Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

Job 40
1 The Lord said to Job:
2 “Will the person who argues with the Almighty correct him?
Let the person who accuses God answer him.”
3 Then Job answered the Lord:
4 "I am not worthy; I cannot answer you anything,
so I will put my hand over my mouth.

Bottom line God is Sovereign
biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Sovereign&x=15&y=14

Genesis 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

As we can see a soul is created at conception.