Where Do The Souls Go?

[ViaCrucis]

Where do the souls of the aborted go, where do the souls of the miscarried go?

The assumption here seems to be that "souls" "go somewhere".

Which, fair enough, the popular image in the West of Christian teaching--even by many Christians themselves--is that human beings are bodies inhabited by a "soul", and that at death the soul floats away and either goes to a good place or a bad place, and then either enjoys an eternity of endless bliss or an eternity of endless torment.

In spite of how popular that imagery is, and the sad fact that many well-meaning Christians also seem to have a similar view, this just isn't an accurate picture of the historic Christian ideas on eschatology.

That said, let's explore the idea being presented anyway. However, rather than talking about "souls" "going somewhere", I'm simply going to speak in broader terms, namely, how does Christian eschatology address the fate of children who die in the womb. The answer to that question is, frankly, that it doesn't.

Like basically everything else when talking about the question of "what happens to us after we die?", there just isn't that much that is dogmatic. It's partly why in the Western Church, for a very long time, there was a great deal of speculation about what happens to unbaptized infants, one of the first to speculate on the question was St. Augustine of Hippos, who suggested that unbaptized infants might go to "limbo", that is a middling existence that is neither the beatific life of the future age, nor "hell". Those of such opinion tended to view this as, basically, not much different than the life we are already familiar with. Limbo wasn't exclusive to unbaptized infants, in the Middle Ages the idea of limbo also included pious pagans, which is why in Dante's Divine Comedy he encounters the Roman poet Virgil in limbo.

Limbo was never official teaching, however. It has historically been regarded, at least in Catholicism, as an acceptable opinion that individual Christians are free to believe or not believe.

The simple fact of the matter is there is no way to provide for a definitive answer to the question. As noted, very little about eschatology has ever had anything resembling a consensus in historic Christian teaching.

The question of exactly who is and who isn't saved, in the end, isn't something any Christian can answer--and frankly shouldn't, because any answer given (no matter how popular it may be among some Christians) is only going to be private opinion, not Christian dogma.

So speaking personally: I've put my trust in Jesus, not just for my salvation, but for everyone's salvation. It is my deep prayer and sincere hope that, when all is said and done, and when God makes all things new, everyone will be saved. That's my hope. What will happen? How could I even begin to possibly know or answer that question?

And, I suspect, that the opinion of many others will be similar--concerning the death of those who never heard the Gospel, whether they died in the womb, or died of old age, we hope that they will be saved, and entrust everyone to the mercy and kind justice of God.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Lazarus Long]

The assumption here seems to be that "souls" "go somewhere".

Which, fair enough, the popular image in the West of Christian teaching--even by many Christians themselves--is that human beings are bodies inhabited by a "soul", and that at death the soul floats away and either goes to a good place or a bad place, and then either enjoys an eternity of endless bliss or an eternity of endless torment.

In spite of how popular that imagery is, and the sad fact that many well-meaning Christians also seem to have a similar view, this just isn't an accurate picture of the historic Christian ideas on eschatology.

That said, let's explore the idea being presented anyway. However, rather than talking about "souls" "going somewhere", I'm simply going to speak in broader terms, namely, how does Christian eschatology address the fate of children who die in the womb. The answer to that question is, frankly, that it doesn't.

Like basically everything else when talking about the question of "what happens to us after we die?", there just isn't that much that is dogmatic. It's partly why in the Western Church, for a very long time, there was a great deal of speculation about what happens to unbaptized infants, one of the first to speculate on the question was St. Augustine of Hippos, who suggested that unbaptized infants might go to "limbo", that is a middling existence that is neither the beatific life of the future age, nor "hell". Those of such opinion tended to view this as, basically, not much different than the life we are already familiar with. Limbo wasn't exclusive to unbaptized infants, in the Middle Ages the idea of limbo also included pious pagans, which is why in Dante's Divine Comedy he encounters the Roman poet Virgil in limbo.

Limbo was never official teaching, however. It has historically been regarded, at least in Catholicism, as an acceptable opinion that individual Christians are free to believe or not believe.

The simple fact of the matter is there is no way to provide for a definitive answer to the question. As noted, very little about eschatology has ever had anything resembling a consensus in historic Christian teaching.

The question of exactly who is and who isn't saved, in the end, isn't something any Christian can answer--and frankly shouldn't, because any answer given (no matter how popular it may be among some Christians) is only going to be private opinion, not Christian dogma.

So speaking personally: I've put my trust in Jesus, not just for my salvation, but for everyone's salvation. It is my deep prayer and sincere hope that, when all is said and done, and when God makes all things new, everyone will be saved. That's my hope. What will happen? How could I even begin to possibly know or answer that question?

And, I suspect, that the opinion of many others will be similar--concerning the death of those who never heard the Gospel, whether they died in the womb, or died of old age, we hope that they will be saved, and entrust everyone to the mercy and kind justice of God.

-CryptoLutheran

None of that aligns with the christian premise under discussion but thanks anyway for your input.

 

[ViaCrucis]

.

 

[ViaCrucis]

None of that aligns with the christian premise under discussion but thanks anyway for your input.

Could you be more clear. You say none of what I said aligns with the premise, be more specific please. What exactly in what I wrote is off topic to the question you're asking?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Lazarus Long]

This is an incredibly weak argument. The texts we refer to as the Canonical Gospels weren't written in a vacuum, they were written for and within the context well-established Christian communities which existed, and which were already familiar with the material (and possibly depending on exactly who the Theophilus mentioned in Luke-Acts is).

Let's frame it another way. Two thousand years from now someone finds a 2020 article quoting someone from the 1970's. It's the only, or at least the oldest, surviving witness to what that person said. Concluding, on that basis alone, that the 2020 article is specious because it quotes someone from 1970 and the author of the article never met the person--well that's just silly.

It would be completely rational to ask whether or not the article is accurate, if the information contained can be trusted, and different people could come to different conclusions based upon any number of factors. But to simply say, "Nope, written fifty years later, unreliable" is a bad argument.

-CryptoLutheran

So someone who has never met me in sixty years time writes a story about me and quotes a conversation I allegedly had, you'd believe it without question. Religion relies on that level of gullibility.
And you don't know who wrote them or where they were written, so don't compound the errors.

 

[Lazarus Long]

In spite of how popular that imagery is, and the sad fact that many well-meaning Christians also seem to have a similar view, this just isn't an accurate picture of the historic Christian ideas on eschatology.

This. You reject the mainstream view as referenced in my OP therefore your opinion is not relevant to the discussion.

 

[ViaCrucis]

So someone who has never met me in sixty years time writes a story about me and quotes a conversation I allegedly had, you'd believe it without question.

I deleted my post in hopes of avoiding a pointless and tangent argument. But guess that's going to happen anyway.

No. I wouldn't believe what someone wrote sixty years later who never met you, nor did I say we should believe the hypothetical article I described in my now deleted post.

I said, "It would be completely rational to ask whether or not the article is accurate, if the information contained can be trusted, and different people could come to different conclusions based upon any number of factors."

What, exactly, in that statement led you to conclude that I think something should be believed without question?

Also, it would appear that rather than engaging with my argument, you have refused to engage it. That's fine. Because my argument was that assuming a later writer is inherently false because they are later is a bad argument. Journalists in the modern era regularly include quotes from persons whom the authors of those articles never met. Did they just invent the quote? If they are unscrupulous, maybe; but without attributing malice to an author, a perhaps better assumption is that the quote comes from somewhere. I never met Richard Nixon, but I can quote Richard Nixon. Does that make me quoting Nixon false? The answer is no. Because it's a pretty reasonable assumption that I am using a source for the quotation. If, in two thousand years, the oldest surviving mention of Nixon saying "I'm not a crook." is me writing it right here, would it be more reasonable for that person two millennia from now saying, "ViaCrucis never met Richard Nixon, therefore he made it up." Or would it be more reasonable to think, "ViaCrucis possibly, even probably, had sources which are not now known or available to us."?

That was my argument.

At no point, in either my previous now deleted post, or in this post here, have I argued that the Gospels must be reliable, or that the Gospels must be true. I haven't argued for the reliability of the Gospels, I have only addressed the flaw in your reasoning.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

This. You reject the mainstream view

False.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

What I expressed in my post is the mainstream.

If you were to go to a room with theologians from Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican, et al--from all the major and historic churches, you'd get an answer very similar to what I said. What I wrote is in keeping with two thousand years of Christian tradition and teaching.

The idea that human beings are bodies inhabited by a kind of "ghost" called a "soul" is NOT the mainstream Christian view. It is, at best, misleading, and at worst, heretical. The historic teaching of Christianity has, largely, been that human beings are a psychosomatic unity. We are not enfleshed souls, we are ensouled bodies. The "soul" is not a "ghost". The soul is the animating principle, what distinguishes a corpse from something living--when earlier generations of Christians speak about the soul, they often employed the language of Greek philosophy. Of different kinds of "soul". For example, plants have a "soul", a "vegetative soul", because a plant is certainly alive. Likewise animals have a "soul", an "animal soul", the animal life they have driven by instinct and their various behaviors. Humans, however, are distinguished from plants and animals because we have a "rational soul". We aren't dumb animals driven purely by instinct, we are rational animals, creatures endowed with reason, with sapience, and with moral agency and culpability. And it is precisely this rational soul which early Christians spoke of as representing the Image of God--that human beings are creatures who bear the Divine Image, who can therefore relate to God, worship God, etc.

Thus, in the language employed by the Church historically, the soul is understood as rational consciousness--a mind capable of reason and higher thought; the soul is the "seat" of the will and emotions. A human being can make a choice, and can be held responsible--culpable--to that choice. It speaks to our volition, and our ability to experience joy, grief, sadness.

So, no, the orthodox, historic, mainstream teaching of Christianity is not that when we die, this whisp leaves our body, floats upward until it reaches some place in the sky called "Heaven", and hangs out there playing a harp for all eternity.

The orthodox Christian position is that after death, somehow, but there is no clear position or consensus, there is a foretaste of what is to come. In the West that has typically been perceived by using language like "going to Heaven". In the East, however, this foretaste is an experience in the realm of the dead--Hades. The righteous experience a foretaste of the future life of the Age to Come, and the wicked experience a foretaste of judgment (note, however, that in Eastern Orthodoxy the ultimate state of the righteous and the wicked are not understood as different places, but as the same place--in God's presence being loved by Him).

This is known in Christian eschatology as the "intermediate state", the state between death and resurrection. The simple fact of the matter is that the Bible itself hardly says a thing about this. And that there is no definitive orthodox, mainstream Christian position on any details. Thus the mainstream Christian position is that beyond saying that there will be those who experience a foretaste of the Age to Come in Christ's presence (what that actually means, what that "looks like", etc is a complete and utter unknown) and there will be those who, well, don't.

The actual meat and potatoes of Christian eschatology is Christ's return, the resurrection of the dead, the last judgment, and the restoration of all things, the life of the Age to Come. All the stuff written in our Creeds,

From the Apostles' Creed
"We believe in Jesus Christ ... He ascended into the heavens, is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty, from whence He will return to judge the living and the dead.

We believe in ... the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen."

From the Nicene Creed
"We believe ... in one Lord Jesus Christ ... He ascended into the heavens and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.

...

We look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and to the life in the Age to Come. Amen."

From the Athanasian Creed
"He ascended into the heavens, sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty. From there He shall come to judge the living and the dead. At His coming, all human beings are to arise with their own bodies; and they are to give an account of their own deeds."

If you'd like more, perhaps from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Lutheran Book of Concord, or the official teaching or statements made by Christians from across various denominations/traditions and from throughout history, I'm more than willing to do so to make my point.


-CryptoLutheran

 

[Lazarus Long]

This is known in Christian eschatology as the "intermediate state", the state between death and resurrection.

And what is experiencing this intermediate state, this foretaste of heaven or hell and for how long does it last? Does a fetus have the same experience and how does it? Did Marty not believe in souls but did believe the sun orbited the earth?
Or was it a flat earth, I forget?

 

[Marumorose]

So you say they go to hell, that's worse than being aborted, if abortion is evil then your god sending them to hell is much, much, much worse.

I never said God is sending them to hell. We go to hell because of our deeds. You need to learn more about the Kingdom of darkness and how it operates

 

[Desk trauma]

I never said God is sending them to hell. We go to hell because of our deeds. You need to learn more about the Kingdom of darkness and how it operates

The souls attached to those who are miscarried or aborted preformed no deed at all.

 

[loveofourlord]

my understanding is that soul and breath were synonymous back then, I mean it would make sense that at least with so many natural misscarriages that god wouldn't imprint a soul into a fetus that is going to never make it anyway, so if so knowing about abortions and other things, god could plan for other things and not put a soul in until it was born as so many problems can arrise.

 

[ViaCrucis]

And what is experiencing this intermediate state, this foretaste of heaven or hell and for how long does it last?

Unknown. Until the resurrection of the dead.

]Does a fetus have the same experience and how does it?

Unknown. But we put our trust in God, who is good, we can trust in God's kindness and justice, as we read in the first epistle to Timothy, "God is the Savior of all human beings". God is not the Savior of only some, but of all.

Did Marty not believe in souls but did believe the sun orbited the earth?
Or was it a flat earth, I forget?

Yes, like most people at the time, Luther believed in the old, but false, idea of geocentrism.

Luther, like anyone who had even a little bit of education, knew the earth was round. Because we've known the earth is round since the days of the ancient Greeks.

However, I fail to see what Luther's views on such subjects as being even remotely relevant here. Luther had a lot of views that were stupid and wrong. Luther had a lot of views which Lutherans still champion, as found in some of our confessional texts.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Lazarus Long]

my understanding is that soul and breath were synonymous back then, I mean it would make sense that at least with so many natural misscarriages that god wouldn't imprint a soul into a fetus that is going to never make it anyway, so if so knowing about abortions and other things, god could plan for other things and not put a soul in until it was born as so many problems can arrise.

You don't seem to understand that your god creates billions of souls for the express purpose of torturing them for eternity. Why would he play your game?

 

[ViaCrucis]

You don't seem to understand that your god creates billions of souls for the express purpose of torturing them for eternity. Why would he play your game?

"Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. All the categorical strength and point of this aphorism lies in its tautology. Outside the Church there is no salvation, because salvation is the Church.’ Does it therefore follow that anyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned? Of course not; still less does it follow that everyone who is visibly within the Church is necessarily saved. As Augustine wisely remarked, ‘How many sheep there are without, how many wolves within!’‡ While there is no division between a ‘visible’ and an ‘invisible Church’, yet there may be members of the Church who are not visibly such, but whose membership is known to God alone. If anyone is saved, he must in some sense be a member of the Church; in what sense, we cannot always say." - Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 240

"The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all. But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions. For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his Sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit. It enables each person to attain salvation through his or her free cooperation.

For this reason the Council, after affirming the centrality of the Paschal Mystery, went on to declare that 'this applies not only to Christians but to all people of good will in whose hearts grace is secretly at work. Since Christ died for everyone, and since the ultimate calling of each of us comes from God and is therefore a universal one, we are obliged to hold that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in this Paschal Mystery in a manner known to God.'" - Pope John Paul II, Redemptio Missio, 10

"We must keep the ordered power in mind and form our opinion on the basis of it. God is able to save without Baptism, just as we believe that infants who, as sometimes happens through the neglect of their parents or through some other mishap, do not receive Baptism are not damned on this account. But in the church we must judge and teach, in accordance with God’s ordered power, that without the outward Baptism no one is saved. Thus it is due to God’s ordered power that water makes wet, that fire burns, etc. But in Babylon Daniel’s companions continued to live unharmed in the midst of the fire. This took place through God’s absolute power, in accordance with which He acted at that time; but He does not command us to act in accordance with this absolute power, for He wants us to act in accordance with the ordered power." - Martin Luther, Lectures on Genesis

If this is confusing, let's simplify it:

Salvation is found in Christ, it is Christ who saves. The ordinary means, the means by which God has instructed the Church, by which this salvation comes to us is through Word and Sacrament; the preaching of the Gospel, Baptism, etc. Thus the Church, as the mystical body of Christ, is understood as the organism by which the individual is joined to Jesus, and thus salvation happens in their life here, through the work of God, by the grace of God. This does not, however, mean that only professed Christians will be saved. It does not mean that God's hands are tied, and that if one isn't visibly a member of the Church, i.e. a Christian, that they are therefore damned.

The ordered and ordinary means, given by God to the Church, does not translate to God being constrained, restricted, or having His hands tied. God, being God, by His absolute power, His absolute means as God, is quite capable of saving any, all, whosoever.

Which is why the Church cannot say who is and who is not saved. Will anyone be damned? The warning of Scripture is that men who would choose their own destruction by their own deliberate choice, damn themselves--will anyone do this? Will many people do this? How could anyone possibly know such a question? That is why we confess the ordered means--what God has given to us; and all else we leave in good faith to God. We trust that God is foremost loving, kind, merciful, good, and just; and is proactive, desiring, willing, and on the side of the salvation of all people, and indeed, the whole of creation.

The idea that God is a bouncer who lets only the right kinds of people into heaven if they believe the right things, have the right religion, perform all the right actions is inconsistent with the general confession of the Christian Church over the last two thousand years. And in the modern period tends to be a view maintained only by a handful of Protestants--generally those of the Fundamentalist and Neo-Evangelical traditions.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[lordjeff]

Where has their soul been for the billion years in between?

There is no time or place in heaven. In fact, heaven is a state (status).

 

[Tinker Grey]

There is no time or place in heaven. In fact, heaven is a state (status).

Didn't Jesus say, "I go to prepare a place for you" and "In my Father's house are many mansions"?

Sure sounds like "place" to me.

 

[Lazarus Long]

The idea that God is a bouncer who lets only the right kinds of people into heaven if they believe the right things, have the right religion, perform all the right actions is inconsistent with the general confession of the Christian Church over the last two thousand years

It's actually the teaching of the christian church since it's inception.

 

[Lazarus Long]

There is no time or place in heaven. In fact, heaven is a state (status).

The person I was responding to claimed that the souls weren't in heaven, so where were they?