though I am physically 24 years of age, I had a girlfriend whom told me that my soul was over 1000 Earth years. through our physical relationship she went on to tell me that our Souls were having children. a warning she told of was NEVER name physical children after spiritual children, otherwise they will "posses" them and become whole - already aware of its spiritual self.
so I have a major question (though not applicable): if a spiritual child lived for numerous years, but is no longer in existence, and I would be having a physical child soon; if I named that child the same name, would that "rule" still apply?
Not to be rude but exactly how much crack has your girlfriend been smoking? By that logic if I name my child a common name that would mean there is a 95% there is a "spiritual child" out there with the same name
By this logic there should be millions of possessed children just running around the street
There is no rule and I don't think there are a such thing as spiritual children so don't put too much thought into your child getting possessed
whose logic is askew Zrozex? there are eight billion human souls on this Earth with an infinite combination of names. by your statistics you are focusing on a singular name to be shared with everyone. my question was for a specific name combination (that I do not remember) I am only aware of their first names. as it is, I do not even know my own (full) Spiritual name. Physically I have three names - first, middle, and last - Spiritually, I was told I have four names (I know two of them, and use them often)
While I personally could not tell you the truth of your soul's age or whether you indeed have spirit children, naming them is a non-issue. Likely any spirit children you and her had would've the spirit children incarnate. It take more than having a name to become whole in any form
Children are naturally aware of their spiritual side, though in the process of learning 'what is me, what is not me' and learning what is real and what is not, quite a bit of modern first world society stamps out spirituality. This is why children are more sensitive than a lot of adults.
My personal belief involves reincarnation, though relative to this, is that our souls give 'birth' to our spirits when our bodies are made. In terms of the situation, I don't believe that the soul children mentioned by your ex would possess and take over the lives of physical children you have. They are essentially the same, though one type has a physical body.
Personally, if you like the name and do not know of a "Spirit child" who goes by the same name - then by all means use that name for a physical child.
The idea of a spirit being able to possess a human based on the idea of having the same name seems quite difficult in this age, considering how many names everyone goes by. Nearly everyone has a nickname, a title, and often times a screenname that they go by. So many names for one person, so how could one truly become possessed in this time? I myself go by nine different names - I feel that it would be impossible for a spirit to have exactly the same names for themselves, as well.
If you are truly afraid of your child being possessed by a spirit with the same name, change the spelling or the order a bit so that the name is no longer the same.
Good luck in your endeavors!
I don't think souls have children exactly. Personally, I think it's more likely that souls arrange to be part of a family together when they reincarnate. Souls aren't really created or destroyed like human lives are, at least to some extent souls are everlasting and intangible. I don't think there is a risk with naming your children after (from my spiritual perspective) the name their soul has. If a spirit of any kind decided to possess a child simply because they shared the same name, then your problem would be with that spirit that chose to do something so malicious. Since your soul is apparently acquainted with this spirit, I sincerely doubt you have any issue on your hands.
thank you all for your opinions in this matter. I may have posed the question in a rather quizzical fashion and mislead some people, but you still satisfied my answer :)
