What do you believe happens to the soul of a young child when they die before the soul "actualizes" if the soul is eternal?

The soul does not gets its nobility without acquiring knowledge through intellect, hence this question is irrelevant to some extent (irrelevant as in we can ask and wonder, but why ask and wonder for things which are irrelevant). So to answer your question specifically - as per my own interpretation and understanding - nothing happens to the soul of a young child when they die prior to actualization because the soul has not received the nobility yet.

The soul is individualistic in each person based on the intellect we receive upon gaining consciousness, ...

What do you believe happens to the soul of a young child when they die before the soul "actualizes" if the soul is eternal?

The soul does not gets its nobility without acquiring knowledge through intellect, hence this question is irrelevant to some extent (irrelevant as in we can ask and wonder, but why ask and wonder for things which are irrelevant). So to answer your question specifically - as per my own interpretation and understanding - nothing happens to the soul of a young child when they die prior to actualization because the soul has not received the nobility yet.

The soul is individualistic in each person based on the intellect we receive upon gaining consciousness, and how we use it based on the free will. Those who have not gained consciousness and some how die early (children as in your example) are innocent and pure without either of their choice, because they never reached the stage of free will.

Okay, enough of a serious talk, the clip-atheists will be on my back for long time to come, so I better run

"Soul requires knowledge/intellect first to become a soul which is in an image of God."

"young children does have soul but it is not actualized until it gets consciousness through intellect."

"The soul does not gets its nobility without acquiring knowledge through intellect, hence this question is irrelevant to some extent"

The question is quite relevant in my opinion because it brings up the nature of human children, who in your opinion, have ignoble souls. If that is the case, it would seem that children have a quality that is less than human, since a human is comprised of a physical body and a soul (actualized soul based on your opinion).

A quite noble quality children have that most...

"Soul requires knowledge/intellect first to become a soul which is in an image of God."

"young children does have soul but it is not actualized until it gets consciousness through intellect."

"The soul does not gets its nobility without acquiring knowledge through intellect, hence this question is irrelevant to some extent"

The question is quite relevant in my opinion because it brings up the nature of human children, who in your opinion, have ignoble souls. If that is the case, it would seem that children have a quality that is less than human, since a human is comprised of a physical body and a soul (actualized soul based on your opinion).

A quite noble quality children have that most of us adults do not have is innocence. The opposite of innocence is culpability, blameworthiness, and guiltiness. So how can a soul become actualized if the only requirement is intellect but becomes more blameworthy?

Also how can nothing happen to an unrealized soul after death? Something must happen to it, since it is eternal therefore immortal. Does it cease to exist? Does it reincarnate? Does it go to a state of limbo or something similar?

That innocence is a field where we should all be, we actually loose that field due to ego.

However, from scientific and psychological point of view, there is a very little difference between a soul of a child and a soul of an animal (this does not mean children and animals are not important). The humans are potentially superior over animals due to their soul's ability to receive intellect and reason through nourishment. The animal can go so far even with nourishment, but human being can go beyond if they receive nourishments.

Who provides nourishment to such a soul/human? Some could say God/Maker, some would say their own mind, some would say other human beings, and some would say t...

That innocence is a field where we should all be, we actually loose that field due to ego.

However, from scientific and psychological point of view, there is a very little difference between a soul of a child and a soul of an animal (this does not mean children and animals are not important). The humans are potentially superior over animals due to their soul's ability to receive intellect and reason through nourishment. The animal can go so far even with nourishment, but human being can go beyond if they receive nourishments.

Who provides nourishment to such a soul/human? Some could say God/Maker, some would say their own mind, some would say other human beings, and some would say they receive such nourishments due to the blessing of One Perfect Human Being.

Well it does not matter who provides it, the point is, receiving of such intellect/knowledge actualizes the soul of a human to reach it's potential....without it, the human is just an animal. Once again, this does not mean animal and children are not important.

Sure the ego, the pride, the anthropocentric philosophic way of life is the spoiler to innocence. I should argue that humility is the opposite virtue of such a state and not necessarily intellect. I am not speaking of the humility that belittles oneself as is often portrayed but the humbleness in the true sense.

Even though, if it is true, that the scientific and psychological view states that there is little difference between the soul of a child and that of an animal, I would have to remind you of the point we both agreed on being that man is made by the image of God which is a theological statement. A child has the potential to make good choices from their free will and that soul with th...

Sure the ego, the pride, the anthropocentric philosophic way of life is the spoiler to innocence. I should argue that humility is the opposite virtue of such a state and not necessarily intellect. I am not speaking of the humility that belittles oneself as is often portrayed but the humbleness in the true sense.

Even though, if it is true, that the scientific and psychological view states that there is little difference between the soul of a child and that of an animal, I would have to remind you of the point we both agreed on being that man is made by the image of God which is a theological statement. A child has the potential to make good choices from their free will and that soul with the conscience has been infused with the physical body at the moment of conception.

With experience, through empirical (although not solely) methods, and through the intellect one forms their conscience with the ability to reason and distinguish right and wrong. The conscience and mind is given to the individual soul, it is God given, and one merely forms it, at their own individual determining rate, for the good or not good.

God provides the soul with conscience and mind, it is not something He later adds in life but at the moment of conception, which He deems as good because He provides it. There is a distinction between the soul of an animal and that of a child but not between a child and an adult. There is a difference between the intellect of course but the soul is not mere intellect, it is the image of God. God has various qualities including intellect among others.

There is matter of private revelation which is not usually bearing upon the whole of humanity, which I would agree with both of you. It basically God reaching to an individual for their own good and generally directly irrelevant to next person. Indirectly it is better for the whole because some good on a personal scale ultimately leads to other good outside of the individual. I agree this private revelation is to be kept in the heart, to use biblical language: the heart of the soul, not necessarily the physical heart which pertains to one's own well being. Of course this should be kept and contemplated to make the best out of it which leads to a better understanding of it and better use of ...

There is matter of private revelation which is not usually bearing upon the whole of humanity, which I would agree with both of you. It basically God reaching to an individual for their own good and generally directly irrelevant to next person. Indirectly it is better for the whole because some good on a personal scale ultimately leads to other good outside of the individual. I agree this private revelation is to be kept in the heart, to use biblical language: the heart of the soul, not necessarily the physical heart which pertains to one's own well being. Of course this should be kept and contemplated to make the best out of it which leads to a better understanding of it and better use of it. It would almost seem to spoil the thing if you went out and preached it.

On the other hand, there is a matter of absolute revelation meaning it is for the whole. Young and old, rich and poor, male and female, etc. It is relevant to each and every one of us. This is not merely relative to me or you but binding on each one of us. Not the kind of binding that makes us slaves to it but actually makes us free, liberated and complete.

We given the ability to discern and distinguish false and true revelation. This can easily be done by judging the fruit or the evidence of certain teachings. Otherwise if we were not given this ability we would be tossed to and fro with no firm foundation. False revelation can be useful to affirm what is true revelation.

False revelation can easily be ruled out if it contradicts our given ability to reason. Reason and truth never contradict, they are two from the same source. God has used fallible men and women to teach infallible revelation which makes it truth. If a fallible man or woman teaches fallible revelation then it is not from God but human and should not be adhered to.

So we a...

We given the ability to discern and distinguish false and true revelation. This can easily be done by judging the fruit or the evidence of certain teachings. Otherwise if we were not given this ability we would be tossed to and fro with no firm foundation. False revelation can be useful to affirm what is true revelation.

False revelation can easily be ruled out if it contradicts our given ability to reason. Reason and truth never contradict, they are two from the same source. God has used fallible men and women to teach infallible revelation which makes it truth. If a fallible man or woman teaches fallible revelation then it is not from God but human and should not be adhered to.

So we agree that all human revelation from a human source is fallible. But human revelation from a Divine source is infallible. We do not necessarily disagree but I felt further clarification on revelation should be made.

That is a problem when humans try to define revelation to their own standards as opposed to what revelation from God reveals. That is why we have absolute revelation which is for the all, while individual revelation if doesn't coincide with the absolute, is erroneous. But which or what form is absolute revelation? For if the Divine source is love, would want to establish a relationship with us but must reach out to us. Otherwise God would be indifferent, not caring and therefore imperfect which is improper of God.

God reaches out to us and I believe if we seek we shall find. It is reciprocation to at least establish a relationship. God, who is love, desires this and would like for us to kn...

That is a problem when humans try to define revelation to their own standards as opposed to what revelation from God reveals. That is why we have absolute revelation which is for the all, while individual revelation if doesn't coincide with the absolute, is erroneous. But which or what form is absolute revelation? For if the Divine source is love, would want to establish a relationship with us but must reach out to us. Otherwise God would be indifferent, not caring and therefore imperfect which is improper of God.

God reaches out to us and I believe if we seek we shall find. It is reciprocation to at least establish a relationship. God, who is love, desires this and would like for us to know Him and the more we know Him, the more can love Him.

May I be so dare as to propose that God has revealed Himself as man? Revelation is therefore not a mere idea but a Man. He has become a human person so that we may establish a relationship with Him in the fullest sense. The Word/Logos/Memra becoming flesh. That has to be the most outrageous, yet perfect way of God reaching us.