Do animals have souls?

[WindyHair]

marc, is that in the bible or a stretched interperatation?

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

My understanding, having research it, the literal of spirit, is breath, biblically, or wind, our soul, technically is the thing that animates us, yes, it is a mystery, more than we see, but it is the meaning, our soul is our life. It is aeviternal, and no, it is the works of aquinas, the catechism, EWTN and other sources I used, you aren’t a sola scriptura heretic, are you?

 

[WindyHair]

But by an large, we physically subjugate the earth. WE change land forms, water ways, and all that. We control animals, even making them extinct.

I agree. We cannot say that they will or will not be in heaven.

so you believe nature was created specifically for humans?
i think that is common judaism belief. how do you explain
though the many life forms that have nothing to do with humans.
i mean, do we really need half of all insects? do you believe
then that animals/plants did not exist before humans? if they did,
why? is nature just material? is sacrificing my dog for my religion ok?

if we were made in the image of god, doesn’t it seem apes have been made in the image of us?

 

[WindyHair]

My understanding, having research it, the literal of spirit, is breath, biblically, or wind, our soul, technically is the thing that animates us, yes, it is a mystery, more than we see, but it is the meaning, our soul is our life. It is aeviternal, and no, it is the works of aquinas, the catechism, EWTN and other sources I used, you aren’t a sola scriptura heretic, are you?

those sources that you use, are those interpretations?
and how many times have they been reinterpereted throughout history and by whom and how many?

 

[WindyHair]

My understanding, having research it, the literal of spirit, is breath, biblically, or wind, our soul, technically is the thing that animates us, yes, it is a mystery, more than we see, but it is the meaning, our soul is our life. It is aeviternal, and no, it is the works of aquinas, the catechism, EWTN and other sources I used, you aren’t a sola scriptura heretic, are you?

no i’m not, but your animist roots are showing.

 

[ralphinal]

so you believe nature was created specifically for humans?

Yes and no. Creation was created because God’s love desired more to love. We are the apex of Creation. We needed a place to live. It is not ours to destroy but to care for.

i think that is common judaism belief. how do you explain
though the many life forms that have nothing to do with humans.
i mean, do we really need half of all insects?

Yes. I cannot say what effect any loss of any species will have on the whole ecosystem. If a creature is there, it is needed in some way.

do you believe
then that animals/plants did not exist before humans? if they did,
why?

What I beleive is unimportant, because the basic belief that a Christian should have is that God made everything out of Nothing and He saw it all as good. Personally, I think that it was done along a continual stages process. Animals existed before Humans.

is nature just material? is sacrificing my dog for my religion ok?

I am not sure what you mean by “just material.” No, sacrificing your dog is not ok in my book. Why does God need you to do that once we had the sacrifice of Christ?

if we were made in the image of god, doesn’t it seem apes have been made in the image of us?

Again, you are looking at anatomy and physiology. I am talking about philosophy and theology. Apes do not have free will or immortal souls. Besides, only the Creator can make something in an image of anything else.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

What I would want to see is a non-herd, non-pack animal morning loss or any of that. THen we can say that there may be more to it than instinct.

The Image and Likeness of God has nothing to do with looks. It has to do with having Free-Will (ability to determine life choices), ability to judge right from wrong, intellect, reason, and the ability to love. Only humans have all of these.

Ralph,
You have just ruled humanity out of consideration for the possession of souls.
Humans are most definitely pack animals.
Yes, we are talking different degrees of magnitude, but society is an entity clearly derived from the pack, and moral law is clearly derived from pack discipline.

The relationship between the species Canes and Homo, which is older than historical time, is a clear indication of this.
The pack can comprehend society as a pack, and we can interpret pack discipline as a precursor for morality.

 

[ralphinal]

Ralph,
You have just ruled humanity out of consideration for the possession of souls.
Humans are most definitely pack animals.
Yes, we are talking different degrees of magnitude, but society is an entity clearly derived from the pack, and moral law is clearly derived from pack discipline.

Not exactly my point. My point was that non pack animals do not morn loss. We are pack animals, we morn losses. Maybe I said it wrong. If we were strictly solitary creatures, you would be correct.

The relationship between the species Canes and Homo, which is older than historical time, is a clear indication of this.
The pack can comprehend society as a pack, and we can interpret pack discipline as a precursor for morality.

I agree.

 

[WindyHair]

Not exactly my point. My point was that non pack animals do not morn loss. We are pack animals, we morn losses. Maybe I said it wrong. If we were strictly solitary creatures, you would be correct.

I agree.

sorry but no creature is solitary.
no living being is solitary.

even single cells gravitate towards each other.

 

[ralphinal]

sorry but no creature is solitary.
no living being is solitary.

even single cells gravitate towards each other.

Not all creatures have social groups. Some live in mated pairs or alone.

 

[Swan]

I’m with the Native Americans on this - yes, I believe animals have souls.

 

[hamba2han]

Do animals have souls?

Christians and Jews really do need to read their own Bible in order to obtain the answer.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

Well, windy hair, as an evolutionist, I am pleased, we both agree on my routes, sorry, I did not know you were agnostic.

The point you have is the Catholic point, how many times must we change views. Catholics have believed what we believe about animals, as recorded for at least 1700 years, it is certainly that old, if not more, whether or not they go to Aeviternity with us, well, there are different views, but our faith is one throughout time, so far as doctrine and moral truth.

Heretic, not an insult, it’s a baptised person who refuses to accept this timeous doctrine. Protestants are material heretics, and material schimastics, some are actual of both (to avoid confusion, and having to explain stuff, we call them separated brethren, or maybe that’s other non-catholic “christians”).

in any case, my view is consistent. It is historical, and to be honest, I prefer to go with unaltering views. But the islamic man had a good group of links in agreement with me, so, we all agree.

 

[WindyHair]

Well, windy hair, as an evolutionist, I am pleased, we both agree on my routes, sorry, I did not know you were agnostic.

The point you have is the Catholic point, how many times must we change views. Catholics have believed what we believe about animals, as recorded for at least 1700 years, it is certainly that old, if not more, whether or not they go to Aeviternity with us, well, there are different views, but our faith is one throughout time, so far as doctrine and moral truth.

Heretic, not an insult, it’s a baptised person who refuses to accept this timeous doctrine. Protestants are material heretics, and material schimastics, some are actual of both (to avoid confusion, and having to explain stuff, we call them separated brethren, or maybe that’s other non-catholic “christians”).

in any case, my view is consistent. It is historical, and to be honest, I prefer to go with unaltering views. But the islamic man had a good group of links in agreement with me, so, we all agree.

does old make it true? is the world still flat?
i always find it funny when religious people use age of religion
as a qualifier for truth. 1700 years is old for humanity, yes, but
there are many religions that are much older. if anything, animism
would be our one true religion. it goes back much further than any
judaism religion and actually is at the root of all religions.

 

[LDNCatholic]

does old make it true? is the world still flat?

To be fair, not many people actually believed that. Most people thought the Earth was pear shaped.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

Perhaps, but truth is often consistent, and no, animal religions did not exist before the first forms of Judaism. The problem is, those religions either evolved, or never changed, so same argument- older, not necessarially.

I suspect you had another motive in starting this thread, and suspect also your intent, versus my honesty, I apologise, I must withdraw.

 

[WindyHair]

Perhaps, but truth is often consistent, and no, animal religions did not exist before the first forms of Judaism. The problem is, those religions either evolved, or never changed, so same argument- older, not necessarially.

I suspect you had another motive in starting this thread, and suspect also your intent, versus my honesty, I apologise, I must withdraw.

animism is not animal religion.
if you truly studied religion, you would know.

but you know what’s consistent?
people’s stubborness in seeing the world
only through their viewpoint. it’s the
reason for wars.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

Ok then, I thought you meant paganism, which is modern in it’s current form. What I mean, is the Idea of something at the route of it has always been there. By animalism, do you mean the rituals which mimic animals?

p.s. my understanding is mostly of religions in recorded history, and not in groups like the San.

P.s. is this religion like many we have on my own continent, the sort which helps aid hunts, and explains things without science, in that case, is it any different than myth, and folklore, and theatre?

I am ignorant, please do expand on this. I thought you meant something like the African Cultural Phenominom we have here, like the “cradle of humankind” (I hated the cramped place and bone rock, but the skeletons, and research were fascinating).

I hear the other group also had ritualistic tendancies, the Neadathals, but that’s from National Geographic, and in the fields I am well off in, they sometimes are out of date, so I may be wrong.

In any case, how does this aid agnosticism, proving that there was always religion, and that this is unique to sentience?

 

[RosalieM]

Pope John Paul II said that animals do have souls. If you don’t believe me, just do a Google search using key words : “Pope John Paul II says animals have souls.” I asked the Franciscans and was told animals have souls and that’s why it’s a mortal sin to abuse animals.
Now as for whether the souls are immortal, many learned men have said no. Frankly, I’m dizzy from many things many learned men have said.
I say God can do anything. Fr. Benedict Groeschel (learned yet humble) was quoted here on CAF as saying “Anything that is good and beautiful and gives you joy on this earth will be with you in heaven.” And so I believe our beloved pets can be with us in heaven and will perhaps even be able to speak to us. Heaven is beyond our imagination. No one knows the Mind of God. I love my little cat who is dying of cancer and I am more and more convinced it’s not the end, thanks be to God. I can see her beautiful soul on her beautiful face. There is much more but I’m sure you already think I’m nuts. So be it.
p.s. - I won’t be following up on posts in this thread. Just giving my two cents. I am not open to discussion about this subject which now dwells in my heart. God bless you all. Bye.

 

[buffalo]

animism is not animal religion.
if you truly studied religion, you would know.

but you know what’s consistent?
people’s stubborness in seeing the world
only through their viewpoint. it’s the
reason for wars.

That is exactly why the search for the truth is essential. We find the fullness of truth to exist in the Catholic Church.