M
MCH1
Guest
Post deleted.
Last edited:
That’s one person’s opinion. You are free to accept it, or reject itdoesn’t seem like conjecture, the way it is written, at the end of the article, it says we know for sure
But then he goes on to admit that there are arguments on both sides regarding the question of whether there could be animals in heaven in general. And so he says:“And there couldn’t be any sort of resurrection of these animals since resurrection presupposes a continued existence of some sort.”
If that latter argument works in favor of “keeping them in existence” for animals in general, why could it not be the answer to the issue of old pets be re-created needing to have a “continued existence”? No reason that I can see. It seems to me that if that argument holds for one group of animals (i.e. animals in general), it would also hold for the other (i.e. our old pets).“Those in favor argue that there is nothing intrinsic to the nature of God or animals that would prohibit God from creating new creatures and miraculously keeping them in existence. Just as God will preserve other material things from corruption, including the human body, he could very well create new non-human animals and preserve them from corruption.”
So I’m a bit puzzled as to why Broussard so absolutely rules it out. From everything else in Aglialoro’s article and even his own article, nothing really refutes the idea that it is still a possibility that God could re-create those animals and sustain their existence in heaven.The Communion of Saints suggests that heaven will be a social place, that God’s face-to-face presence will not automatically make us tune out all else. If the heavenly host can commune with one another, perhaps they may also rub Fido’s belly or scratch Mittens behind the ears.
Dr. Peter Kreeft, in his book, “Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Heaven, But Never Dreamed of Asking” (Ignatius 1990) replies to the question, “Are there animals in Heaven?” with: “The simplest answer is: Why not? How irrational is the prejudice that would allow plants (green fields and flowers) but not animals into Heaven! Much more reasonable is C.S. Lewis’ speculation that we will be ‘between the angels who are our elder brothers and the beasts who are our jesters, servants and playfellows.’ Scripture seems to confirm this: ‘Thy judgments are like the great deep; man and beast thou savest, O Lord.’ (Psalm 36:6) Animals belong in the ‘new earth’ as much as trees.”it says we know for sure
I suppose I haven’t thought through the mechanics of what that would look like. I see no reason why it wouldn’t be the same dog. I just use the word “re-created” because God would in a sense be creating the animal over again as animals don’t have immortal souls by their nature the way humans and angels do.so he could create a new dog that is exactly the same as the old dog, if I am understanding you correctly. can God really make the exact same thing twice? if an dog is re-created, would it still be Macy for example?