Do you think we existed before we were incarnated?

[Spiderman]

I'm reading Allan Kardec's "The spirits book" and the spirits tell him that when we die, the spirit returns to the world from whence it came. Before being incarnated in our mother's womb, our spirit existed in a spirit-world. While we are alive, we are temporarily beings of the material-world. When we die, our spirit returns to that purely spirit-world that it came from. Do you think that is true?

 

[McBell]

no, I do not.
I have not seen or heard anything that convinces me it is anything other than wishful thinking.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I believe in reincarnation, so yes.

 

[ronandcarol]

Do you think we existed before we were incarnated?
NO!
Psalm 139 says, For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.
ronandcarol

 

[Quintessence]

Yes, but not as described in the OP. It's... complicated. The problem with approaching questions like this is the space-time reference. Determining what "before" is and "after" is, even what "now" is, as well as what "here" is and "there" is. But for practical purposes, we really only perceive here-place and now-time. Usually. Sort of. And then the answer to the question becomes "no." And "kinda." A little bit of "maybe."

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

There's a problem with the logic of the entire idea anyway. That is, the definition of "you". What do you consider "you"? Your consciousness? Your body? You "soul"? Ultimately the "soul" is what ends up being important to the ideas of an afterlife, so for the sake of argument, let's say it IS your soul that defines you... then what is that, exactly? Well, it doesn't come with any innate knowledge of its own - this is proven by the fact that we're born with nearly zero understanding outside of a few instincts. And then, our personality and mental/emotional traits are built upon from very little (think "baby") and we slowly become functional and knowledgeable about various facets of the world around us due to the way in which we are nurtured. Now, none of that can really be attributed to the "soul" either - this is proven by the fact that damage to the brain can have a profound impact on cognitive function - you can literally lose huge swaths of your nurtured "self" to brain damage. If the "soul" was the thing that held all of our parts of "self", then our personality, intelligence, understanding - all of those would remain intact even if the brain were damaged - but let's face facts - they DO NOT, necessarily, remain intact. Human experience has proven this.

Ultimately, my point is this - if your soul is not your personality - not your intelligence - not your knowledge-base - not your emotionality - not your memories - not anything that makes your human-self "YOU" - then what the hell do you care what happens to it?

 

[BSM1]

There's a problem with the logic of the entire idea anyway. That is, the definition of "you". What do you consider "you"? Your consciousness? Your body? You "soul"? Ultimately the "soul" is what ends up being important to the ideas of an afterlife, so for the sake of argument, let's say it IS your soul that defines you... then what is that, exactly? Well, it doesn't come with any innate knowledge of its own - this is proven by the fact that we're born with nearly zero understanding outside of a few instincts. And then, our personality and mental/emotional traits are built upon from very little (think "baby") and we slowly become functional and knowledgeable about various facets of the world around us due to the way in which we are nurtured. Now, none of that can really be attributed to the "soul" either - this is proven by the fact that damage to the brain can have a profound impact on cognitive function - you can literally lose huge swaths of your nurtured "self" to brain damage. If the "soul" was the thing that held all of our parts of "self", then our personality, intelligence, understanding - all of those would remain intact even if the brain were damaged - but let's face facts - they DO NOT, necessarily, remain intact. Human experience has proven this.

Ultimately, my point is this - if your soul is not your personality - not your intelligence - not your knowledge-base - not your emotionality - not your memories - not anything that makes your human-self "YOU" - then what the hell do you care what happens to it?

Especially if you have zero control over the "soul".

 

[Jainarayan]

Per my belief in what Lord Krishna says, we did exist and will continue to exist: Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be. Bhagavad Gita 2.12

 

[Kilgore Trout]

We are the complex result of a myriad of emergent processes shaped by countless experiences and interactions, not a soul download into a container. You don't exist without the neural substrate (the 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion synaptic connections) which you exist within.

 

[Kemosloby]

I think it might be half true. I suspect our spirits exist in two worlds, as humans incarnate we try to draw our spirits to us from the other dimension, while the spirit is constantly being drawn back into the other dimension by other forces in sort of a tug of war for spiritual "growth" or wholeness. Yes, i just made that up but it's probably as good as Allen Kardec's story. imo.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm reading Allan Kardec's "The spirits book" and the spirits tell him that when we die, the spirit returns to the world from whence it came. Before being incarnated in our mother's womb, our spirit existed in a spirit-world. While we are alive, we are temporarily beings of the material-world. When we die, our spirit returns to that purely spirit-world that it came from. Do you think that is true?

Somewhat. I believe we are spirits and we live as spirits (or Carlita* in Spirit just as I usually say Family in Spirit) after we die. I believe that our individual spirits interact with other people; and, we are just a continuation of life just in a different form instead of just disappearing from existence which the laws of physics don't support.

I don't believe we existed as spirits before we were born. We were just forming as babies and the energy/spirit (or in rough terms heat) and all of that formed who we are today. What makes spirit people is that our energy is never separated from us. We see this in our thoughts in EEG waves. We connect with our energy in all of our senses. To those who are in touch with this energy, they are in touch with their "spirit." After death, our family, and people we know who "remember us" remember us with all their sense (I hope) in spirit. That is how we are alive. Energy doesn't die and it's not reincarnated.

Here is a favorite quote:

Spirits don't forget us; but, they can "not exist" when we forget them.

 

[ArtieE]

I'm reading Allan Kardec's "The spirits book" and the spirits tell him that when we die, the spirit returns to the world from whence it came. Before being incarnated in our mother's womb, our spirit existed in a spirit-world. While we are alive, we are temporarily beings of the material-world. When we die, our spirit returns to that purely spirit-world that it came from. Do you think that is true?

I don't know and have no beliefs regarding the matter. But I recommend you read Michael Newton. Amazon.com: Michael Newton: Books, Biography, Blog, Audiobooks, Kindle

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I voted no.
I think "we" are not singular, but are constituted of many, many parts that have come together, and will go their ways when we die. (and actually, are coming and going all through our lives).
I believe some of those parts may be from/exist in/return to the spirit worlds, but that isn't all of us...

 

[allfoak]

Gospel of the Nazirenes
Chap 37

8."So through many changes must you be made perfect, as it is written in the book of Job, 'I am a wanderer, changing place after place and house after house, until I come into the city and mansion which is eternal.'"

 

[Skwim]

Doesn't incarnated imply a previous form? Something is incarnated from something else?


.

 

[allfoak]

Doesn't incarnated imply a previous form?


.

yes

 

[McBell]

We are the complex result of a myriad of emergent processes shaped by countless experiences and interactions, not a soul download into a container. You don't exist without the neural substrate (the 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion synaptic connections) which you exist within.

Whoa there Bill Nye....
Can you dumb that down for us not so intelligent intellects?

 

[ArtieE]

Per my belief in what Lord Krishna says, we did exist and will continue to exist: Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be. Bhagavad Gita 2.12

I remember precious little of my last 13.7 billion years and absolutely nothing from before that. Except I have this nagging feeling that I played with something I shouldn't have and it resulted in this huge explosion. Maybe the explosion gave me amnesia.

 

[allfoak]

Whoa there Bill Nye....
Can you dumb that down for us not so intelligent intellects?

He is just offering the opposing (opposite) view.

 

[Spiderman]

Doesn't incarnated imply a previous form? Something is incarnated from something else?


.

One definition of incarnated is: "embody or represent a spirit in human form."