The Hall of Souls: Fact or Legend?

Well, I'll tell ya what I believe, but there ain't biblical verses to back this stuff up. (In other words, the biblical pundits on this site will probably try to prove me wrong, but whatever - I know I'm right. )

All of us - all souls - were created at the same time. Yes, long, long before the creation of the physical world on which we now reside. We were the very souls talked about in the "war in heaven" where some supported God and others Satan. We were all there, and chose God's side - that's why we're here.

Reffering to this "House of Souls", I haven't the slightest. But I do know that every soul that God has created will have a chance to obtain a physical body, whether before or during the millenial reign is unimportant.

But that's what I believe. I can back it up scripturally, just not biblically.

I can tell you about the Mall of souls, or embryonic genesis. WWW Link

But I do know that every soul that God has created will have a chance to obtain a physical body

Do you mean to say that angels will or have had physical bodies? Can you please show me something about this?
Thanks!

Xythe

Yes we have bodies in heaven, but not made of flesh, you had one before you left, and when you leave the flesh, you return to it. It is what we will be in during the millenial period.
San Chonino is pretty much on the mark in his/her post. We were/are the Elohim and were with God before the overthrow.....just how long before could be billions of years....we cannot comment on that for it is not written, so it is up to the imagination as to how long we have lived before ever coming down here to earth to pass through this flesh life.. All we know for certain is that when we are absent from the flesh, we are with the Father, whether it is a "Hall" or a NASCAR raceway, or hanging out on one of the millions of the Father's planets watching Dinosaurs wrestle with one another. I would imagine that life there is pretty much as it has always been, except for the period of time getting sidetracked in the war with Satan and those that he won over by his trickery.
However , there will not be total peace in Heaven until Satan is kicked out by Michael, when Satan pretends to be Christ here on earth. There will be peace in Heaven, for they will no longer have that ranting , raving, madman around causing all the calamity.

OB77

I'd be interested to know where we get the idea that angels have souls at all. "Soul" might be a more narrowly defined idea. Would everything with life that is created have a soul? If God made insects without souls that serve a function, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that angels have them.

In reference to soul storage, the place you are talking about is called the Guf.

If all the souls of angels and men were created at the same time, and the angels were present before men are born into the flesh, where are the souls of men being held until they are born?

I believe that new souls are being created all the time. Old souls are the ones that have been around for ages, and have incarnated on earth many times. These souls won’t get knocked about or affected emotionally by the world’s negativities or fallibilities. Their inner muscle is strong and their spiritual wealth great. People like Victor Frankl (read his testimony on the internet, he’s a fascinating soul), Martin Luther King, and Mother Teresa, etc. would have been old souls.

Souls come from the One Source, God, so strictly speaking all souls have existed in one form or another for all eternity, without beginning or end. A soul is ‘born’ in its individualised form when God so chooses to create another soul.

Consider the following analogy. Think about a huge vat, or ocean, of washing up liquid. If you put a little hoop into the vat and gently blew through the hoop, little bubbles would spawn and float around in their own merry way. In a similar way, all souls are spawned from God. The difference between the washing up liquid and God, is that God is a spiritual Being, and we too are spiritual beings, created in the divine image and likeness. We have all embarked on a journey, and the difference between us and the bubbles is that we make choices and decisions along the way, we are consciously aware of our own existence, and we inwardly feel and experience life. As we grow spiritually, we become stronger and wiser souls, and slowly become closer to spiritual perfection. At the end of our journey, in eons time, we go back to God, and our wisdom and strength is absorbed and appreciated eternally by the Godhead.

I try not to go beyond what is written but think this is a good question. I do see in scripture that we were pre-ordained before the foundation of the earth so I think God at least had an idea that we would be planted here on this earth and put in the book of the living. But outside of that is mere conjecture on our part and very intense for our mere human brain lobes.

I used to wonder if we were not shown a preview before we came here somehow, because when I was very young I used to have the oddest sensation that I'd seen or been in certain situations that I was presently going through. I also remember my son as a baby looking at a picture of Jesus on the wall and grinning from ear to ear so I did wonder.........

I do not believe in reincarnation, nothing to do with my opinion, but because scripture makes it clear that it's not to be so....... that can't be it.

I'd be interested to know where we get the idea that angels have souls at all.

Luk 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
These are Christs words, and "They" referrs to "the childeren of this world", which would be us humans.

If we humans have souls, and at the time that we are ressurected we will be "equal to the angels", then I assume angels must have souls as well.

Adam has a soul, as well as Jesus. I am under the impression that all spiritual beings have souls.

In reference to soul storage, the place you are talking about is called the Guf.

Yes Andy, the Hall of Souls is also known as The Chamber of Guf, which according to Jewish mystics lies in the 7th heaven. The seventh Heaven, under the leadership of Cassiel, is the holiest of the seven Heavens provided the fact that it houses the Throne of Glory attended by the Seven Archangels and serves as the realm in which God dwells; underneath the throne itself lies the abode of all unborn human souls. It is also considered the home of the Seraphim, the Cherubim, and the Hayyoth.

I do not believe in reincarnation, nothing to do with my opinion, but because scripture makes it clear that it's not to be so....... that can't be it.

Agreed!

I do not believe in reincarnation, nothing to do with my opinion, but because scripture makes it clear that it's not to be so....... that can't be it.

KFC, some parts of the Bible support reincarnation. For example, Elijah's life is documented in the OT, (first couple of chapters of II Kings), but in the New Testament, Jewish priests were sent to ask John the Baptist, "Art thou Elijah?" (John, 1:21). And Jesus said of John the Baptist "this is Elijah." (Matthew 11:14.) This could be interpreted to mean that John was Elijah reincarnated.

John 9:1-3 also implies that the disciples believed in reincarnation. The disciples see a man who was born blind, and ask Jesus whether the man had sinned to cause his blindness. They could only be referring to a previous lifetime, otherwise the question makes no sense. (Jesus replies that in this case neither the man nor his parents sinned, but I think the disciples' question is significant.)

As ever, regarding most Biblical verses, it’s a question of subjective interpretation.

Reincarnation makes a lot of sense, and I believe that those who are spiritually aware and whose intuition has blossomed will believe in it for sure.

"If we humans have souls, and at the time that we are ressurected we will be "equal to the angels", then I assume angels must have souls as well."

Equal doesn't necessarily mean of the same spiritual makeup. It could mean equal in terms of the hierarchy of beings, equal in power, esteem, etc. I was always taught that angels were created, but God actually breathed life into Man which made a 'living soul'.

I don't think we can really assume the same of angels.

Equal doesn't necessarily mean of the same spiritual makeup.

If I look up "Equal" in the Websters, I come up with words like, the "same", and "identical". These words seem pretty clear to me that humans will be just as Jesus says, "equal to the angels".

I do not see the word "equal" ambiguous in any way. We do not need to assume. Jesus tells us in his own words. He does not tell us that we will be equal to angels under any uncertain terms. What he says clearly appears to be absolute.

I was always taught that angels were created, but God actually breathed life into Man which made a 'living soul'.

Gen 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.

Please note the teaching is "a living soul", which indicates that the soul of Adam was created prior to God "breathing life into his nostrils" giving the soul mortality.

I don't think we can really assume the same of angels.

In this statement I wholly agree with you. Angels were present long before God "formed man of the dust of the ground", and God has not "breathed life" into the nostrils of any angels. It goes without saying since angels have spiritual bodies, and man is constrained to a flesh body.

The conclusion here is that as Jesus mentions, some men will lose their mortal flesh, and become equal to the angels in every respect.

...but in the New Testament, Jewish priests were sent to ask John the Baptist, "Art thou Elijah?" (John, 1:21).

John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elijah? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that Prophet? And he answered, No.

I am noticing here when John the Baptist is asked if he is Elijah, he simply answers no. Is John the Baptist lying or deliberately misleading his questioners here?

John 9:1-3 also implies that the disciples believed in reincarnation.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The disiples are wondering how a man could be born blind if he could not sin (before he was born), or if his parents sinned, is this the reason for the mans blindless.

Jesus goes on to answer in John 9:3 - Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.

Jesus goes on to explain that God made this man blind (perhaps in order for Christ to perfom the coming miracle):

John 9:3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
John 9:4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
John 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
John 9:6 When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay,
John 9:7 And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.

Nothin in anything from the 9th chapter of John indicates reincarnation in the slightest. Should anybody interpret that from these verses that the disiples believed in reincarnation (which IMHO is way off the mark), rest assured that Jesus sets things straight without ANY doubt.

Reincarnation does not exist anyblace in the bible that I have ever seen.

"If I look up "Equal" in the Websters, I come up with words like, the "same", and "identical". These words seem pretty clear to me that humans will be just as Jesus says, "equal to the angels". I do not see the word "equal" ambiguous in any way. We do not need to assume. Jesus tells us in his own words. He does not tell us that we will be equal to angels under any uncertain terms. What he says clearly appears to be absolute."

If you look up the word "Child" in Websters I don't think you'll find that it applies to angels very well.

"1 a : an unborn or recently born person b dialect : a female infant 2 a : a young person especially between infancy and youth b : a childlike or childish person c : a person not yet of age 3 usually childe /'chI(-&)ld/ archaic : a youth of noble birth 4 a : a son or daughter of human parents b : DESCENDANT 5 : one strongly influenced by another or by a place or state of affairs 6 : PRODUCT, RESULT

I doubt seriously that Jesus even used the word equal since the word didn't exist then, and I'm not sure Webster's has a version for 2000 year old Aramaic. No, I don't think if you look at the whole thing it is so obvious that "equal" means that we are identical to them in every respect. The comparison was made in terms of a question on a given subject:

"[27] Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him, [28] Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. [29] There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children. [30] And the second took her to wife, and he died childless. [31] And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died. [32] Last of all the woman died also. [33] Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife. [34] And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: [35] But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: [36] Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection."

Neither Jesus nor the people who translated the Bible had the benefit of a Webster's Dictionary. I hope you literalists haven't taken your idea of inerrancy and applied it to Webster now too, lol.

In reference to soul storage, the place you are talking about is called the Guf.

thought it was called the GUR

thought it was called the GUR

Gur is a set of languages.

.

.

.

Jennifer,

Xythe the way you say it

Its not the way I say it, John 9:3,4,5&7 are Jesus's own words, and John 9:6 is an act of Jesus.

It's not for me to judge what God does and does not do. The man was blind from birth. God did not blind the man. In fact he made the mans life better when Jesus annointed his eyes with the "clay". Far from cruel and unfair? I think so.

Perhaps the man was blind as a consequence of a birth defect, kinda like crack-baby defects. In this case, the defect would be because of some act of free will by a crack-babys parents. It just so happened that Christ came across this blind man, and Gods work was manifest in the blind man when Jesus gave him his sight.

Please Jen, see this miracle. God used this blind man (for what ever reason he was born blind) to show people that Jesus had the power of God to wield. Notice the similarity in Gen 2:7 and John 9.6, where God uses the "dust of the earth" to create the first living man, and Jesus spits on the ground of dust and "made a clay" and annoints the blind mans eyes. This is no mere coincidence!

God did not make the man born blind, but Christ chose him to perform a very important miracle. That alone is a very great blessing for the blind man.

If you look up the word "Child" in Websters I don't think you'll find that it applies to angels very well.

Nor is the word "child" used in Luke 20:36. However the word "childeren" is, and is well defind as to that words meaning if you continue to read the sentence, "and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection."

I doubt seriously that Jesus even used the word equal since the word didn't exist then,

Dont be silly, of course he did not use the word "equal". He used the word "ισάγγελος" or, "isaggelos", pronounced as "ee-sang'-el-los", translated from the Strongs Exhaustive Concordance to "like an angel, that is, angelic: - equal unto the angels."

Neither Jesus nor the people who translated the Bible had the benefit of a Webster's Dictionary. I hope you literalists haven't taken your idea of inerrancy and applied it to Webster now too, lol.

Again, please do not be silly, we all know Websters did not exist back then any more than the English language.

We simply use the translated bible so we can read the word of God. If we canot understand our own language, then we seek the credible Websters Dictioanry to help us with that.

Is a "literalist" a person whom understands what they read or simply literate?

The OP in this regaurd is a lot better than youir redefining words to suit your own purpose.

...applied it to Webster now too, lol.

Many laughed at Christ and his disiples as well. When you laugh at me, it has the same effect it had on T/them; we pity you:)

"God did not make the man born blind..."

You sure? How? You speak with complete confidence about a lot of things you have no way of knowing is true or not. God blinded other people in the Bible, so I see no reason to believe that given previous blindings that he wouldn't blind this guy before birth.

"God used this blind man (for what ever reason he was born blind) to show people that Jesus had the power of God to wield."

Just like he used the old testament god is described as imposing suffering and death of Job, his family and servants to make a point to satan. Do you really believe a perfect God would abuse his creation to make a point? If you abused your child to make a point we'd call you less than human. Do you really believe God is less moral than we are?

"Nor is the word "child" used in Luke 20:36. However the word "childeren" is, and is well defind as to that words meaning if you continue to read the sentence, "and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection."

Ah, so Webster's is wrong about its definition of children (i.e. more than one child) in this case regardless of context but it is dead on about its definition of equal regardless of the fact that Jesus was talking about one aspect of the afterlife. With what authority do you pick and choose?

"Dont be silly, of course he did not use the word "equal". He used the word "ισάγγελος" or, "isaggelos", pronounced as "ee-sang'-el-los", translated from the Strongs Exhaustive Concordance to "like an angel, that is, angelic: - equal unto the angels."

Like isn't equal. Which is it? You are relying on a nuance of language from a document passed through the centuries, also based upon some man-made concordance. Yet you know with complete assurance based upon this fact that angels have souls.

One vastly subjective word "equal", translated from a more subjective phrase, and you know that you are right and I am wrong.

"Is a "literalist" a person whom understands what they read or simply literate?"

No, a literalist is someone who believes in the literal truth of a man-made, paper and ink Bible as though it is the word of God. I call it idolatry, personally, but the word most often used are biblical literalists.

"Many laughed at Christ and his disiples as well. When you laugh at me, it has the same effect it had on T/them; we pity you:) "

Save your pity. I pity people who sit with glazed eyes and ponder mythology while the world around them suffers. Why not ponder how many angels can dance on the head of a pin while you are defining their spiritual makeup and deciding if there is a big pool of souls somewhere...

Ah, so Webster's is wrong about its definition of children (i.e. more than one child) in this case but is dead on about its definition of equal. With what authority do you pick and choose?

I choose part 6 of your definition from Webster...

6 : PRODUCT, RESULT

A PRODUCT of God and a PRODUCT of the resurrection.

If you abused your child to make a point we'd call you less than human. Do you really believe God is less moral than we are?

I beleive the way God thinks is beyond my human scope of comprehention. It is not up to me to judge the morality of a supernatural being. It seems from your statements however that you in fact do place yourself in that regard.

Why not ponder how many angels can dance on the head of a pin while you are defining their spiritual makeup and deciding if there is a big pool of souls somewhere...

More sillyness. I'll pray for you child

Just like he used the old testament god is described as imposing suffering and death of Job, his family and servants to make a point to satan. Do you really believe a perfect God would abuse his creation to make a point? If you abused your child to make a point we'd call you less than human. Do you really believe God is less moral than we are?

Ok, I am not going to go through all the scripture quoting or anything of that sort. But you are stating that you believe in God. Or at least you are debating His Word and what it means.

So..As for the statement about God allowing people to suffer, and allowing things to happen. He gave us free will. So if we have free will then we have the choice to worship God, and be one of His children.. Does He not have the right to test us ( through allowing things to happen ) to see how strong are faith in Him is, and if it is true? Many times the only way we learn more about God and become closer to Him, is through the tribulations He allows. He says that He will never give us more than we can handle. As for Job. We have never been put through what Job went through. To lose all, to fall ill, to be left completely alone. Yet Job STILL worshipped God, and kept his faith in Him. He did not say " God this is cruel of you to test me in such a way, and to allow such things to happen".I doubt your or many of us would be able to be so strong as Job was in that situation.And what happened in the end ? Job had everything restored to him.God did not say "Hey thanks Job. Just wanted to prove to Satan that you are Mine, and My child. Sorry about your losses." As for the blind man..when Jesus gave him sight ..did he say " How dare your Father allow me to be born blind in order for you to show His power"??? No.

If God did not allow things to happen, in order for us to see His works and His will, then how would we ever know or learn? Is not the Bible an accont of things said and done in order for us to learn more about God and His way?, and will for us? And also, that is where faith comes into play. If we have faith that there is a God, and we have faith in God, then we need to have faith in the things He allows, no matter what His reason(s) may be for them.

You said " If you abused your child to make a point we'd call you less than human" How can you compare God's actions or allowances to those of our own? We are no where to being on the same level as God.We can be Christ-like when we accept Jesus as our Savior. But even then we could not compare ourselves to God.No one can, nor will ever be comparable to God.

God does not abuse His creation. He allows things to happen for His own reasons. And if we want to sulk and cry about what we feel is unfair then that is our free will to do so. Instead , we could seek God and learn lessons from why such things happen, or maybe our situation that He has allowed will become a testimony to someone else. And probably many things we will never know as to why they were allowed, and that is ok.

Yes God could simply allow everything to happen in a positive way without pain, suffering, anger, grief, and so on. But we live in a sin filled world. How would we understand tribulations and triumphs in life, if God allowed nothing bad to ever befall anyone?

We are down here, God is up there. Why we only see and hear about what happens around us, He sees the whole picture.

Like isn't equal. Which is it? You are relying on a nuance of language from a document passed through the centuries, also based upon some man-made concordance. Yet you know with complete assurance based upon this fact that angels have souls.

You seem not to believe that the Bible is as the true Word of God. Yes it was written by man and things have been translated through the years, but it is STIlL the Word of God.And the Truths of it are as strong as they were when the Bible came into place.