Pets afterlife?

[vsedriver]

I think one of the things that gets left out of this arguement all the time is that Heaven is Paradise. If we get there we get to live in the presence of God. What could possibly be more amazing than that?

If Christ Himself said there would be no husbands and wives in Heaven how could you imagine that you would need a pet to be happy in Heaven?

As a lifelong horse lover, and a recent dog lover. I don’t need my pets in Heaven to make me happy. I only need to be in the presence of God.

God did not breathe animals into life the way he breathed into Adam. Humans are unique among all his creation because Humans alone have an Immortal Soul. Animals only have a mortal soul and that was taught to me back in Catholic Grade School. I still love my animals and care for them. I still have pictures of my dogs and horses that are no longer with me. To say that there are animals in Heaven is to say that Humans and Animals are equals in the eyes of God.

 

[vsedriver]

With respect, I say a soul is a soul is a soul. There’s no logical reason to assume that God created a special kind of soul for man, and nothing in the Bible that I’m aware of that supports that concept.

I suggest you read Genesis Chapter 1:26 God said, ‘Let us make man in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves, and let them be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven, the cattle, all the wild animals and all the creatures that creep along the ground.’

I see no justice in condemning animals to oblivion upon death and cannot fathom a god that would do so when they are innocent and much more deserving of heaven than we’ll ever be.

Again, I suggest you read Genesis. God clearly created man in His Own Image and only man so mankind are not the same as animals.

 

[ryanhn]

Again, I suggest you read Genesis. God clearly created man in His Own Image and only man so mankind are not the same as animals.

I’m not suggesting that animals are on an equal par with humans here on this earth, only that there’s no good reason that I know of to assume that the souls of animals are any less immortal than ours. I am familiar with Genesis, however it is not clear to me how one draws the conclusion that our being created in God’s image makes our soul immortal while other souls not-so. I am actually curious about St. Thomas Aquinas’ reasoning for coming to such a conclusion and have begun working my way through his Summa Theoligica to try to find it, but given that it appears to be even longer than Moby Dick, it would be nice if someone here who shares his opinion could give the rest of us some direction as to where we might find the subject within his work. Or even better, if someone could share his reasoning with us here in this thread that would be especially considerate.

 

[ryanhn]

Again, I suggest you read Genesis. God clearly created man in His Own Image and only man so mankind are not the same as animals.

I might add, with respect to the rest of your post, it is equally unclear to me how our dominion over animals or their lack of conceptualizing life and death (which is itself an assumption) is in any way relevant to the mortality or immortality of their souls.

 

[Catholicpotato]

I have to say at this point that I haven’t seen one good argument in this thread as to why the repeated assertions that animals do not have immortal souls is likely to be true. Regurgitating the opinions of others proves nothing except that someone else shares your view, or that you’ve adopted their opinion because you trust that they know what they’re talking about. Unless you can cite good reasons as to why their, and consequently your, opinion is likely to be true then that adoption is based solely on blind faith. Blind faith is never a persuasive argument and has little merit or value in my book. Neither is the fact that one of those people was canonized a saint after death convincing. Even if you believe saints are closer to God than the rest of us when in the flesh, that is in no way the same as being infallible and all knowing. Spiritual leaders and religious authorities have been wrong on other issues in the past, so there is no more reason to automatically assume that St. Thomas Aquinas was correct on this one in his earthly writings than there is to believe that the Church leaders of Galileo’s time knew what they were talking about when they asserted that Earth was at the center of the universe and actually tortured Galileo for suggesting otherwise. We all know today that they were mistaken. No, short of a convincing argument as to why he was likely correct, I have no reason to think that my Gunther will be cast into the darkness and obliterated when he passes. As such, I extend an olive branch to the original poster of this thread who hopes to see the animals he or she loved in the afterlife and say I see no good reason to give up that hope. Those who attempt to shatter it by citing the opinions of others without something to back them up are merely being cruel mindless drones in my opinion.

While I share your opinion of the little logic or proof being offered on this thread I cannot come to you conclusion.
While the Bible and theologians have understandable been a little quiet on this silly subject I have yet to see any credible Christian theologian in support of fido in the afterlife. Lets face it. The argument is purely emotional. We now live in a world where it isnt 2.5 kids and a 2 car garage anymore, but rather no kids and 5 dogs and a subaru outback. people refer to their pets as “fur babies” their blogs. The UN is condidering giving “human” rights to all living things even trees. We live in a world gone mad.
Looking at the Bible, at what Christ has done for us, looking to the Fathers and to many Holy men and women, I just cannot fathom why this is an issue. It is presumed that every LIVING thing has a soul, that man’s soul is immortal and others are not. It is also Biblical that we will not be “married” in heaven. I think that is significant. If we are not in need of the flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone in heaven then why would we own a dog or a cat. Since all living things have souls then perhaps the beautiful cherry tree in my yard that brings me joy every spring can join me in heaven.

On a positive note, besides being in the presence of God (which should be enough) We will also have the angels (that will be a whole different “animal”) And all holy men and women that have EVER lived… yet some still think they cant do without ole spot and mrs fluff fluff. A being that one has for roughly 10 years and then develops such an addiction that they feel they need to bring this possesion with them into the afterlife. Kind of reminds me of the parable of the rich man who was sad that he had to give all his possesions away to follow Jesus.
God gave us these wonderful animals to comfort, help and for us to “love” enjoy them people… But please dont base your theology on a dog but rather the opposite of dog… God.

 

[Catholicpotato]

Our “hope” should be in Christ. God, the one truly Holy being created US is HIS image, Called us His Children, was born as one of US. Taught US how to live. Died for US so that we may see His amazing love, suffered for US and for our sins, all our sins.
We sit here arguing the existance of a mut in the afterlife when our own salvation is far from secured. How presumptuous of us, how ignorant of what God has in store for us, how ungrateful of us!

As the great Catholic saint Paul said. “with fear and trembling I work out my own salvation”
Perhaps we should worry if we will be in heaven, or hey, what about our families… but no, we just cannot comprehend a world without fur. When everyone is holy, when we have witnessed and shared the Gospel with everyone, when there is just no more work to be done, perhaps then we can talk about baptizing our furbies with the water of salvation…

Something to think about this Holy week as we reflect on what Christ had to do to just open the narrow gate a little for us…
Now, we offer our broken selves to Him, our imperfections and our doubt, our weakness and our selfishness, at the foot of a bloody cross, and yet still we say, “Jesus, this isnt enough, I just cannot imagine your paradise without my dog.”

 

[ryanhn]

While I share your opinion of the little logic or proof being offered on this thread I cannot come to you conclusion.
While the Bible and theologians have understandable been a little quiet on this silly subject I have yet to see any credible Christian theologian in support of fido in the afterlife. Lets face it. The argument is purely emotional. We now live in a world where it isnt 2.5 kids and a 2 car garage anymore, but rather no kids and 5 dogs and a subaru outback. people refer to their pets as “fur babies” their blogs. The UN is condidering giving “human” rights to all living things even trees. We live in a world gone mad.
Looking at the Bible, at what Christ has done for us, looking to the Fathers and to many Holy men and women, I just cannot fathom why this is an issue. It is presumed that every LIVING thing has a soul, that man’s soul is immortal and others are not. It is also Biblical that we will not be “married” in heaven. I think that is significant. If we are not in need of the flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone in heaven then why would we own a dog or a cat. Since all living things have souls then perhaps the beautiful cherry tree in my yard that brings me joy every spring can join me in heaven.

On a positive note, besides being in the presence of God (which should be enough) We will also have the angels (that will be a whole different “animal”) And all holy men and women that have EVER lived… yet some still think they cant do without ole spot and mrs fluff fluff. A being that one has for roughly 10 years and then develops such an addiction that they feel they need to bring this possesion with them into the afterlife. Kind of reminds me of the parable of the rich man who was sad that he had to give all his possesions away to follow Jesus.
God gave us these wonderful animals to comfort, help and for us to “love” enjoy them people… But please dont base your theology on a dog but rather the opposite of dog… God.

I tend to agree that we live in a world gone mad, but not necessarily for the same reasons. I also agree that we humans can get a little carried away at times with our obsession for our loved ones, in every form. Maybe I won’t care when I get to heaven (or perhaps I should say IF I get to heaven) whether Gunther is there or not. Maybe a wife won’t care whether her husband is there. Or her children. The point is we care now while here on this earth. I can’t speak for anyone else, but personally I haven’t been very lucky in the love department. I’m 42 years old and the longest human relationship I’ve had lasted six years. The others were far shorter. My relationship with Gunther has lasted twice that long. He’s been with me through thick and thin. He’s never hurt my feelings. He’s never rejected me and I don’t believe he ever will. A dog’s life is far too short. That all being said, how could I not hope to be reunited with him? Possessions are things. Animals are not things. Things don’t have personalities, experience joy or pain. I don’t really think of myself as Gunther’s owner in this life, but more as his caretaker. I certainly don’t envision myself owning him in the next. I envision him being free to come and go as he pleases. Free to eat whatever he wants, as much as he wants (if the pleasure of eating can be experienced there that is). Free of the terrible arthritis in his knees, able to jump and play as he did in his youth. And it’s my hope that he’ll choose to be with me. That might all sound silly to some people, but it’s not to me. And asking me not to care one way or another while on this earth, or trying to take away that hope without sound reasoning as to why that hope is in vain, is as I’ve said nothing short of cruel in my opinion.

 

[Catholicpotato]

I tend to agree that we live in a world gone mad, but not necessarily for the same reasons. I also agree that we humans can get a little carried away at times with our obsession for our loved ones, in every form. Maybe I won’t care when I get to heaven (or perhaps I should say IF I get to heaven) whether Gunther is there or not. Maybe a wife won’t care whether her husband is there. Or her children. The point is we care now while here on this earth. I can’t speak for anyone else, but personally I haven’t been very lucky in the love department. I’m 42 years old and the longest human relationship I’ve had lasted six years. The others were far shorter. My relationship with Gunther has lasted twice that long. He’s been with me through thick and thin. He’s never hurt my feelings. He’s never rejected me and I don’t believe he ever will. A dog’s life is far too short. That all being said, how could I not hope to be reunited with him? Possessions are things. Animals are not things. Things don’t have personalities, experience joy or pain. I don’t really think of myself as Gunther’s owner in this life, but more as his caretaker. I certainly don’t envision myself owning him in the next. I envision him being free to come and go as he pleases. Free to eat whatever he wants, as much as he wants (if the pleasure of eating can be experienced there that is). Free of the terrible arthritis in his knees, able to jump and play as he did in his youth. And it’s my hope that he’ll choose to be with me. That might all sound silly to some people, but it’s not to me. And asking me not to care one way or another while on this earth, or trying to take away that hope without sound reasoning as to why that hope is in vain, is as I’ve said nothing short of cruel in my opinion.

Believe me I understand the love of pets and the love especially of a dog. But if it is sound reasoning you need then here it is: You own your dog. You may not have that relationship, you may not “feel” that way but pets are bred, sold, and registered. You do not unite in Gods love in the marital embrace to create a pet, you do not expect that pet to understand God, eternity, morality, or even reason. You train it. You purchase it. And you can sell it. It is a possesion in the eyes of the law. Worth about 500 dollars or so. I honestly think Gods gift to us is pets on earth. SOME pets can be a reflection of what we should be to God. A loyal, obedient, freind. We could learn much from domestic animals.

I understand you need a companion, so does God.
I understand you feel pain when you see suffering in an animal. So does God.
I understand the love you feel with an animal is satisfying when so many humans let us down. So does God.

What I do not understand is any argument that is not emotional that makes sense of this.

I believe you love your dog.
I believe your dog is loyal to you.
I believe you have a real relationship with your dog.

I do not believe anyone can make a serious case using CHRISTIAN theology on why a pet would be in heaven.

Could pets be in heaven? Well God is God, he can do anything.
But the reality is with what little evidence we have, there is no indication of that. I would really hesitate telling anyone who has lost a pet that they will see it in heaven. It truly circumvents the whole idea of salvation, Jesus, and Love. It belittles what it is to be human. And I would not argue that it elevates animals to human status but rather degrades them into things we cannot “live” without. I wonder, would a pet really want to be saved? Can they appreciate what salvation is? I have to say absolutely not seeing as most humans cannot seem to grasp the idea of the sacrifice of the cross.

My hope for you is that you continue to feel the love with your dog, that you are comforted when the time comes, that humans and animals are able to develop meaningful and love giving relationships with you. But most of all I hope that you have the hope of heaven, that your pain, suffering and brokeness will be comforted forever.

Dog did not die on the cross for you. (though most would) God did.

 

[ryanhn]

Believe me I understand the love of pets and the love especially of a dog. But if it is sound reasoning you need then here it is: You own your dog. You may not have that relationship, you may not “feel” that way but pets are bred, sold, and registered. You do not unite in Gods love in the marital embrace to create a pet, you do not expect that pet to understand God, eternity, morality, or even reason. You train it. You purchase it. And you can sell it. It is a possesion in the eyes of the law. Worth about 500 dollars or so. I honestly think Gods gift to us is pets on earth. SOME pets can be a reflection of what we should be to God. A loyal, obedient, freind. We could learn much from domestic animals.

I understand you need a companion, so does God.
I understand you feel pain when you see suffering in an animal. So does God.
I understand the love you feel with an animal is satisfying when so many humans let us down. So does God.

What I do not understand is any argument that is not emotional that makes sense of this.

I believe you love your dog.
I believe your dog is loyal to you.
I believe you have a real relationship with your dog.

I do not believe anyone can make a serious case using CHRISTIAN theology on why a pet would be in heaven.

Could pets be in heaven? Well God is God, he can do anything.
But the reality is with what little evidence we have, there is no indication of that. I would really hesitate telling anyone who has lost a pet that they will see it in heaven. It truly circumvents the whole idea of salvation, Jesus, and Love. It belittles what it is to be human. And I would not argue that it elevates animals to human status but rather degrades them into things we cannot “live” without. I wonder, would a pet really want to be saved? Can they appreciate what salvation is? I have to say absolutely not seeing as most humans cannot seem to grasp the idea of the sacrifice of the cross.

My hope for you is that you continue to feel the love with your dog, that you are comforted when the time comes, that humans and animals are able to develop meaningful and love giving relationships with you. But most of all I hope that you have the hope of heaven, that your pain, suffering and brokeness will be comforted forever.

Dog did not die on the cross for you. (though most would) God did.

I do not believe anyone can make a serious or meaningful case using Christian or any other theology that I know of on why animals wouldn’t go to heaven either. You say yourself “it is presumed” that all living things have souls, that Man’s soul is immortal while others are not. A thesis based on presumption is no thesis at all, and warrants being called into question. As mentioned previously, based on the idea that souls are non-physical and that nothing non-physical can be destroyed, unless animal souls are in some way not non-physical I can just as easily presume based on Christian tenets that animal souls can no more be destroyed than our own. The lack of a firm directive and absence of clear evidence on both sides leaves one free to make up their own mind as makes most sense to them. I do not believe animals having a place in heaven, or us envisioning that they do, belittles humans at all. On the contrary, I think the fact that we’ve developed enough compassion to actually care that much for an animal as to ponder its fate and wish it the same joy in eternity that we hope for ourselves elevates us and brings us closer to God’s vision for us. I’m not saying our compassion and love for the animal elevates the animal to human status, but since we are created in God’s image it may raise them up much as God’s love and compassion for us raises us up. I don’t think one can make the case that heaven is only for those requiring salvation. Unless I’m mistaken, Heaven pre-existed Man. It was not created after-the-fact as a resting place for Man. You said yourself that the angels will be there and clearly they never needed to be saved. In any case, I thank you for your kind words regarding my relationship with my dog, and respectfully say we don’t need to agree. To say that trying to change someones mind is difficult, especially in matters of faith, would be an understatement. I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind by sharing my perspective, only to keep the debate open.

 

[Catholicpotato]

I do not believe anyone can make a serious or meaningful case using Christian or any other theology that I know of on why animals wouldn’t go to heaven either. yet many have. You say yourself “it is presumed” that all living things have souls, that Man’s soul is immortal while others are not. A thesis based on presumption is no thesis at all, and warrants being called into question. I misspoke we have pretty clear dogma on what a soul is and what has a soul. Should you choose not to accept it there is nothing I can doAs mentioned previously, based on the idea that souls are non-physical and that nothing non-physical can be destroyed,Where are you getting this idea about nothing non physical being destroyed? unless animal souls are in some way not non-physical I can just as easily presume based on Christian tenets that animal souls can no more be destroyed than our own.Ok, now you have to argue that mosquitoes are in heaven, this is so silly. The lack of a firm directive and absence of clear evidence on both sides leaves one free to make up their own mind as makes most sense to them.You are free to choose any belief, you can think that a T rex is in heaven for all I care, and that the sky is only a pretty sunset all the time, it still is not a logical conclusion from any sort of mind twisting you need to do. I do not believe animals having a place in heaven, or us envisioning that they do, belittles humans at all. On the contrary, I think the fact that we’ve developed enough compassion to actually care that much for an animal as to ponder its fate and wish it the same joy in eternity that we hope for ourselves elevates us and brings us closer to God’s vision for us. I’m not saying our compassion and love for the animal elevates the animal to human status, but since we are created in God’s image it may raise them up much as God’s love and compassion for us raises us up. I don’t think one can make the case that heaven is only for those requiring salvation. Unless I’m mistaken, Heaven pre-existed Man. It was not created after-the-fact as a resting place for Man. You said yourself that the angels will be there and clearly they never needed to be saved.Yup. And some angels fell just like man, funny how God teaches us about angels but not animals in heaven… In any case, I thank you for your kind words regarding my relationship with my dog, and respectfully say we don’t need to agree. To say that trying to change someones mind is difficult, especially in matters of faith, would be an understatement. I don’t expect to change anyone’s by sharing my perspective, only to keep the debate open.Amen to this last part. I really hoped that you read my words about you and your dog, I understand and have cried over many a pet in my time I am glad you did not take it as insincere.

In the logic department anyone would fail to make a case for animals in the afterlife. But so much of faith is just that FAITH. It is our job as God’s children to worship and adore only Him. To Love each other as He loves us.
As humans we are wired to love, we love things, people places, and even characters in a book or on TV. Many people cried at the end of “cheers” but I am pretty sure that Sam Malone is not going through the cannonization process. Your argument for loving pets and the love we have for them only proves their worth, is lost in the argument of when we cheer for the victory of our hero in any book or movie.
If you choose to believe the silly notion of pets in the afterlife, good for you, it may even bring peace to you which is probably a good thing. But know that humans, babies, the poor, sinners, lovers, the rich, the infirm… these are the things which we were built to love, If we hone our skills on a cute cuddly animal that is probably a good thing, but we must use those skill in the realm of the creature that God created and loved most of all, eachother. Use you love of animals to help you to love others. Then your silly little belief does not become so silly anymore.

 

[ryanhn]

Originally Posted by ryanhn View Post
I do not believe anyone can make a serious or meaningful case using Christian or any other theology that I know of on why animals wouldn’t go to heaven either. yet many have. Some examples would be helpful for the sake of debate. You say yourself “it is presumed” that all living things have souls, that Man’s soul is immortal while others are not. A thesis based on presumption is no thesis at all, and warrants being called into question. I misspoke we have pretty clear dogma on what a soul is and what has a soul. Should you choose not to accept it there is nothing I can do Again, it would help for the sake of debate if you cited some examples. As mentioned previously, based on the idea that souls are non-physical and that nothing non-physical can be destroyed,Where are you getting this idea about nothing non physical being destroyed? That came from EWTN (or ETWN?). Can’t say where they got it from. unless animal souls are in some way not non-physical I can just as easily presume based on Christian tenets that animal souls can no more be destroyed than our own. Ok, now you have to argue that mosquitoes are in heaven, this is so silly. Actually, as mentioned in a previous post, I don’t have a problem with the idea of mosquitoes, rats, or any other undesirables in heaven. We’re all God’s creations and there’s room for us all. I doubt we have much interaction with them though. In any case, why the need to denigrate an opposing idea? That shouldn’t be necessary if you’re secure in your convictions. The lack of a firm directive and absence of clear evidence on both sides leaves one free to make up their own mind as makes most sense to them.You are free to choose any belief, you can think that a T rex is in heaven for all I care, and that the sky is only a pretty sunset all the time, it still is not a logical conclusion from any sort of mind twisting you need to do. Again, don’t have a problem with dinosaurs in heaven. And again, that need to denigrate. I do not believe animals having a place in heaven, or us envisioning that they do, belittles humans at all. On the contrary, I think the fact that we’ve developed enough compassion to actually care that much for an animal as to ponder its fate and wish it the same joy in eternity that we hope for ourselves elevates us and brings us closer to God’s vision for us. I’m not saying our compassion and love for the animal elevates the animal to human status, but since we are created in God’s image it may raise them up much as God’s love and compassion for us raises us up. I don’t think one can make the case that heaven is only for those requiring salvation. Unless I’m mistaken, Heaven pre-existed Man. It was not created after-the-fact as a resting place for Man. You said yourself that the angels will be there and clearly they never needed to be saved.Yup. And some angels fell just like man, funny how God teaches us about angels but not animals in heaven… Yet he didn’t cast them into oblivion, but banished them from heaven. Had animals ever fallen from his Grace I’m sure he would have mentioned it. In any case, I thank you for your kind words regarding my relationship with my dog, and respectfully say we don’t need to agree. To say that trying to change someones mind is difficult, especially in matters of faith, would be an understatement. I don’t expect to change anyone’s by sharing my perspective, only to keep the debate open.Amen to this last part. I really hoped that you read my words about you and your dog, I understand and have cried over many a pet in my time I am glad you did not take it as insincere

 

[ryanhn]

In the logic department anyone would fail to make a case for animals in the afterlife. That’s where we disagree. It’s perfectly logical to think that a loving God loves all his creations. That he made us special is no reason to assume that he would exclude all other beings from paradise. But so much of faith is just that FAITH. It is our job as God’s children to worship and adore only Him. As stated in a previous post, nobody is advocating animal worship here. To Love each other as He loves us.
As humans we are wired to love, we love things, people places, and even characters in a book or on TV. Many people cried at the end of “cheers” but I am pretty sure that Sam Malone is not going through the cannonization process. Your argument for loving pets and the love we have for them only proves their worth, is lost in the argument of when we cheer for the victory of our hero in any book or movie. Apples to oranges. You’re comparing the love of one of God’s creations with the love of Man’s creation. No one has suggested that there’s a place in heaven for the creations of Man.
If you choose to believe the silly notion of pets in the afterlife, good for you, it may even bring peace to you which is probably a good thing. Thank you for wishing me peace, but silly notion? Again, why the need to denigrate an opposing idea? But know that humans, babies, the poor, sinners, lovers, the rich, the infirm… these are the things which we were built to love, If we hone our skills on a cute cuddly animal that is probably a good thing, but we must use those skill in the realm of the creature that God created and loved most of all, eachother. Use you love of animals to help you to love others. I’m all for expanding our capacity to love, but again, God loves all his Creation. Why should we wish less good for some of his creations than we do for ourselves? Then your silly little belief does not become so silly anymore. Great, let’s wrap it up with yet some more denigration.

 

[ryanhn]

I feel it pertinent to point out that in times of centuries past when the Bible and dogma of the Church were put pen to paper, our attitudes toward animals were very different from today. In ancient times they were seen as little more than food and worthy sacrifices to God. There was not the understanding of them that we possess today. By our own observations, we have seen them exhibit signs of love and compassion not so different from our own. I saw a documentary once which showed elephants that came across the bones of a former member of their fold, and their behavior showed signs of nothing less than mourning and reverence. That animals exhibit no fear of death is not proof that they have no concept of life and death. It could just as well be that they have a better understanding and conviction than even we do that death is not the end giving them nothing to fear of it. I do not see this is as anthropomorphism but simply speculation based on our own observations. Indeed, we even know today that their very DNA is not so different from our own. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that this puts them on an equal par with humans, merely pointing out that they do possess traits that are not so inhuman. In present times, the majority of humanity no longer sacrifices animals to a deity, but have actually taken on responsibility for their preservation. Indeed, God himself made us responsible for their preservation when He commanded Noah to make a place for them on the ark. Why would God seek to preserve them in this life and not make a place for them in the next? Not all animals were used as food for Man or for sacrifice, so the fact that God cared enough to save all of them suggests to me that He loves them, that they have intrinsic value in His eyes, and that they may play a bigger part in His plan than many people would believe. I suggest, were the Bible and dogma of the Church written today animals would be treated very differently in them.

 

[Catholicpotato]

I feel it pertinent to point out that in times of centuries past when the Bible and dogma of the Church were put pen to paper, our attitudes toward animals were very different from today.I agree I think the ancients took better care of and loved animals more because they relied on them for their very survival in a more real and visible way. In ancient times they were seen as little more than food and worthy sacrifices to God. There was not the understanding of them that we possess today.Agree again without the words little more, people saw animals as companions, food, fellow employees and revered them in such a way that they could be seen as sacred enough to sacrifice to a God who actually DEMANDED the sacrifice., Now days we see them as cuddly or wrapped in plastic in store. By our own observations, we have seen them exhibit signs of love and compassion not so different from our own. I saw a documentary once which showed elephants that came across the bones of a former member of their fold, and their behavior showed signs of nothing less than mourning and reverence. That animals exhibit no fear of death is not proof that they have no concept of life and death.This has no bearing on weather their souls survive death… the fact that something “knows” of mortality does in no way guaruantee the Vision of God for eternity. It could just as well be that they have a better understanding and conviction than even we do that death is not the end giving them nothing to fear of it.Oh come one… a fly doesnt fear death because it knows heaven awaits… Can you really make that claim I do not see this is as anthropomorphism but simply speculation based on our own observations. Indeed, we even know today that their very DNA is not so different from our own.But it is different, realitively speaking a potato has a majority of our dna too. A little knowlege is a dangerous thing, the difference between humans and dogs is GIGANTIC genetically. Careful here or you will get some people wanting to marry and mate with an animal, science is not so far away from that kind of a gross display. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that this puts them on an equal par with humans,You keep saying this but your your arguments belie it. Above you even proposed that animals may have a GREATER understanding of the afterlife than us. merely pointing out that they do possess traits that are not so inhuman. In present times, the majority of humanity no longer sacrifices animals to a deity,Because the TRUE Diety sacrificed himself for us as a HUMAN. but have actually taken on responsibility for their preservation. Indeed, God himself made us responsible for their preservation when He commanded Noah to make a place for them on the ark.Actually, even before the ark, dominion does not mean domination. Why would God seek to preserve them in this life and not make a place for them in the next?Why is the sky blue? Many things God created wont be in the next, this is the main problem with theologically poor understandings of earth, heaven, nad hell, we tend to view it as a nicer house in a nicer location in heaven, but in reality it is less materialistic, I blame the protestant notion of actual streets of Gold… Not all animals were used as food for Man or for sacrifice, so the fact that God cared enough to save all of them suggests to me that He loves them, that they have intrinsic value in His eyes, and that they may play a bigger part in His plan than many people would believe.Same could be said for sunsets, pristine mountain lakes and boston in the fall… just because God created beauty for us to enjoy doesnt mean that it has to be duplicated in heaven under the same physical laws. I suggest, were the Bible and dogma of the Church written today animals would be treated very differently in them.Sadly this is true, animals would hardly get a mention. Instead of God’s gorgeous monolouge to Job, talking of animals that he created, he could talk of cars, that a cow is only worth the current price for beef. That bug spray is the holy incence of modern life… Praise to God that it was not written today or Michael Vick would be a prophet.

On a related note, I was speaking of this to my freind the other day and he brought up a good point. What if animals are allowed in purgatory. His reasoning is that purgatory is a place where we bring the things of this life to be cleansed for the next until we are ready and clean for God’s adoration for eternity. What if part of this purification had room for “things” we loved in this life. Letting go of them one by one until only God is our desire… I liked it. I have always been a little freaked out about how long one could be in purgatory, might be nice to have a mut to keep me company until I have been cleaned.

It is also important to remember that Adam had all the animals and it was not enough, he was lonely, so God created a companion for him, was it a dog… nope, it was the mother of all human kind.

PS When I talked of being silly at the end of another post I was trying to say that ones love for animals without exceptional love for man is silly, but if your love for animals makes your love of man better then what people see as silly is not so silly anymore. But you admitedly have trouble with human love… Perhaps that will change. Perhaps the animals are God’s way of filling the hole of broken human mistakes and hurt, and that is why he created them to be freinds with us in this life, there would be no need of that in the next.

 

[ryanhn]

Originally Posted by ryanhn View Post
I feel it pertinent to point out that in times of centuries past when the Bible and dogma of the Church were put pen to paper, our attitudes toward animals were very different from today.I agree I think the ancients took better care of and loved animals more because they relied on them for their very survival in a more real and visible way. Unless you’re a vegetarian, or even more so a vegan, then you are relying on them for your survival today just as much as they were in the past. That some people choose not to kill them or exploit them for their survival and can imagine that there is a place in heaven for them today suggests to me that at least some of us love them more today than in the past. In ancient times they were seen as little more than food and worthy sacrifices to God. There was not the understanding of them that we possess today.Agree again without the words little more, people saw animals as companions, food, fellow employees and revered them in such a way that they could be seen as sacred enough to sacrifice to a God who actually DEMANDED the sacrifice., Now days we see them as cuddly or wrapped in plastic in store. The first animal sacrifice that I’m aware of was that of Abel. God did not command him to do so; he did so of his own volition and that God gave us dominion over animals made us free to do so. It is true that God was more pleased by Abel’s sacrifice than Cain’s sacrifice of wheat which only suggests to me that God saw animals as having more intrinsic value than that of mere sustenance. Ancient man did not revere animals to the degree many of us do today for they did not recognize animals as bearing the spark of divinity that I contend exists in all of God’s creations, or else they would not have been so quick to exclude them from God’s kingdom. I do not see how that divinity can be extinguished upon death, and those of us who say it cannot certainly do not perceive animals as merely cuddly or wrapped in plastic in a store. By our own observations, we have seen them exhibit signs of love and compassion not so different from our own. I saw a documentary once which showed elephants that came across the bones of a former member of their fold, and their behavior showed signs of nothing less than mourning and reverence. That animals exhibit no fear of death is not proof that they have no concept of life and death.This has no bearing on weather their souls survive death… the fact that something “knows” of mortality does in no way guaruantee the Vision of God for eternity. Granted, it does not guarantee it any more than we are guaranteed it, though I know of know concrete reason why they would be denied it. It could just as well be that they have a better understanding and conviction than even we do that death is not the end giving them nothing to fear of it.Oh come one… a fly doesnt fear death because it knows heaven awaits… Can you really make that claim Of course I cannot make such a claim with any certainty, any more than you can make a claim to the contrary. My suggesting the possibility is based on pure speculation and imagination, same as the suggestion that such is not the case would be. I do not see this is as anthropomorphism but simply speculation based on our own observations. (Continued…)

 

[ryanhn]

Indeed, we even know today that their very DNA is not so different from our own.But it is different, realitively speaking a potato has a majority of our dna too. A little knowlege is a dangerous thing, the difference between humans and dogs is GIGANTIC genetically. The genetic makeup of animals differs from species to species. Some are closer to humans than others. Humans and monkeys have a 99% similarity in chromosomes. Though it is the organization of genes that account for most of the differences between species. The science of genetics suggests that humans actually lost genes in order to become human. I hesitate to mention this as I suspect you do not believe evolution played any role in God’s creation. I could be wrong about that, it’s just my gut feeling. Careful here or you will get some people wanting to marry and mate with an animal, science is not so far away from that kind of a gross display. It’s hard to even comment on such a statement. It’s nothing but a red herring. The idea that recognizing similarities in genetic makeup could lead to cross-species romances is such a stretch of the imagination I’m not sure it warrants addressing. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that this puts them on an equal par with humans,You keep saying this but your your arguments belie it. Above you even proposed that animals may have a GREATER understanding of the afterlife than us. I’ve already stated that by their innocence and natural capacity for unconditional love I believe animals may be closer to God while on this earth than we are. I believe free will and our ability to reason causes us to struggle with certain concepts that animals may simply take for granted having no similar faculties. The fact that we’re having this conversation is a case in point. This is not the same as saying they are equal or higher up in the hierarchy of God’s plan. merely pointing out that they do possess traits that are not so inhuman. In present times, the majority of humanity no longer sacrifices animals to a deity,Because the TRUE Diety sacrificed himself for us as a HUMAN Here, here. Jesus put an end to our barbarism. but have actually taken on responsibility for their preservation. Indeed, God himself made us responsible for their preservation when He commanded Noah to make a place for them on the ark.Actually, even before the ark, dominion does not mean domination. Actually, the dictionary definition of dominion in the English language is to control, to rule, though I think we would all agree that a good ruler shoulders responsibility for the well-being of his subjects. I dare say however that throughout human history our dominion over the animal kingdom has been exercised through dominance more so than benevolence. Why would God seek to preserve them in this life and not make a place for them in the next?Why is the sky blue? Many things God created wont be in the next, this is the main problem with theologically poor understandings of earth, heaven, nad hell, we tend to view it as a nicer house in a nicer location in heaven, but in reality it is less materialistic, I blame the protestant notion of actual streets of Gold… I think it’s disingenuous for you to suggest that you or anyone else has any better understanding of what heaven will be like than the next person. Not all animals were used as food for Man or for sacrifice, so the fact that God cared enough to save all of them suggests to me that He loves them, that they have intrinsic value in His eyes, and that they may play a bigger part in His plan than many people would believe.Same could be said for sunsets, pristine mountain lakes and boston in the fall… just because God created beauty for us to enjoy doesnt mean that it has to be duplicated in heaven under the same physical laws. For such to be relevant one would have to presume that God created animals SOLELY for our pleasure. There’s nothing to base such a presumption on. That animals preceded Man one could surmise that God created them for His pleasure, rather than or as much as for ours. As such, there’s no reason to think he wouldn’t want them in His kingdom. I suggest, were the Bible and dogma of the Church written today animals would be treated very differently in them.Sadly this is true, animals would hardly get a mention. Instead of God’s gorgeous monolouge to Job, talking of animals that he created, he could talk of cars, that a cow is only worth the current price for beef. That bug spray is the holy incence of modern life… Praise to God that it was not written today or Michael Vick would be a prophet. Now you’re just being pessimistic and discrediting much of mankind in the present day. For such to materialize, they would have to be written by the worst representatives of Man we could drum up.

 

[ryanhn]

On a related note, I was speaking of this to my freind the other day and he brought up a good point. What if animals are allowed in purgatory. His reasoning is that purgatory is a place where we bring the things of this life to be cleansed for the next until we are ready and clean for God’s adoration for eternity. What if part of this purification had room for “things” we loved in this life. Letting go of them one by one until only God is our desire… I liked it. I have always been a little freaked out about how long one could be in purgatory, might be nice to have a mut to keep me company until I have been cleaned.

It is also important to remember that Adam had all the animals and it was not enough, he was lonely, so God created a companion for him, was it a dog… nope, it was the mother of all human kind.

PS When I talked of being silly at the end of another post I was trying to say that ones love for animals without exceptional love for man is silly, but if your love for animals makes your love of man better then what people see as silly is not so silly anymore. But you admitedly have trouble with human love… Perhaps that will change. Perhaps the animals are God’s way of filling the hole of broken human mistakes and hurt, and that is why he created them to be freinds with us in this life, there would be no need of that in the next.

The thought of being accompanied by Gunther in Purgatory is indeed a pleasing thought. I can easily imagine him putting off his own entry into Heaven for my sake. As far as human companions are concerned, I’ve never suggested that a dog or any other animal can satisfy every human need. And for the record, I never admitted or even suggested that I have trouble with human love, merely that I haven’t been blessed to date with a human companion who would love me 'til death do us part. Being blessed with an animal companion in the meantime who loves me unconditionally, it is only natural for me to wish him the same joy for all eternity that I wish for myself. As far as what we may need in heaven, I think such a concept is irrelevant as to whether or not animals go to heaven. As I said before, heaven preceded Man. It was not created for Man. I think it is a mistake to presume that God created it according to our needs, or lack of them, so I do not see where it would have any bearing on whether animals would or would not be present.

 

[severus68]

The thought of being accompanied by Gunther in Purgatory is indeed a pleasing thought. I can easily imagine him putting off his own entry into Heaven for my sake. As far as human companions are concerned, I’ve never suggested that a dog or any other animal can satisfy every human need. And for the record, I never admitted or even suggested that I have trouble with human love, merely that I haven’t been blessed to date with a human companion who would love me 'til death do us part. Being blessed with an animal companion in the meantime who loves me unconditionally, it is only natural for me to wish him the same joy for all eternity that I wish for myself. As far as what we may need in heaven, I think such a concept is irrelevant as to whether or not animals go to heaven. As I said before, heaven preceded Man. It was not created for Man. I think it is a mistake to presume that God created it according to our needs, or lack of them, so I do not see where it would have any bearing on whether animals would or would not be present.

I have liked your posts and the above on the needs of Man strikes a note for me. Yes we were made in the image of God, yes we have superior intellect but to me thay means we have the obligations that come with such a privilege. However many just speak about how special we are. Its an arrogance about ourselves. Its us, us and us. Yes heaven was there before us and it is not only about us. Christ spoke about God knowing and human . keeping an eye on all His . To me His love for all his creatures does not equate to sending some of them to oblivion.

 

[ConsciousCoward]

Ecclesiastes 3:21

“Who knows that the breath of man ascends upward and the breath of the beast descends downward to the earth?”

That’s really all I have to say. We don’t know for sure who goes to Heaven or Hell, as we don’t have the power of judgement. All we know is that through faith in Christ, we can be saved ourselves, and we can’t speak for others. If God chooses to bring the animals to Heaven, He certainly will.

 

[severus68]

Ecclesiastes 3:21

“Who knows that the breath of man ascends upward and the breath of the beast descends downward to the earth?”

That’s really all I have to say. We don’t know for sure who goes to Heaven or Hell, as we don’t have the power of judgement. All we know is that through faith in Christ, we can be saved ourselves, and we can’t speak for others. If God chooses to bring the animals to Heaven, He certainly will.

Thank you for the passage and your post.