Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Are Animals as innocent as we think?

handy

Member
I believe animals have souls, and are very capable of rational thought. And, while I don't necessarily want this thread to become yet another "Do Animal's Go To Heaven" thread, I'm more than willing to discuss why I think so. Now, I've always assumed that animals, my own animals, Cleo and Antony, Spot and George, Miranda, Salem....(OK enough, I've LOT'S of animals) will be on the New Earth. To me the heaven issue is a moot point as heaven isn't our final destination anyway. I've made the assumption that the animal that I know as Miranda, my cat who climbs up on my lap every evening and makes me pet her, will be on the new earth, because as an animal, Miranda isn't sinful.

However, I've been rethinking this assumption.

I'm an Idaho rancher. I've got animals all around me on a daily basis. And I can tell you animals can be the most cussed, onery critters that walk on this earth. Yesterday, our younger dogs (Spot and George) got loose and ran down to 'herd' our neighbor's llamas. These dogs have been trained to come when called, but they were having so much fun chasing after the llama's they ignored me when I called them to heel. After I got them, I gave both of them a smack on their noses for disobeying me, and I got the 'sad-dog' look from both of them. But, when I loaded them into the back of the car, they started yipping and licking each other and both tails were wagging wildly. They had just had the best time of their lives, and even though they knew they were bad dogs, they couldn't help enjoying it.

Now, I think anyone would agree that if my kids had deliberately done something that they knew was wrong, refused to come when I called them on it, pretended to be sorry just during the time I was disiplining them and then high-fived each other on the good time the moment my back was turned, they were acting sinfully.

The willingness to do something we know is out-right wrong and have the self-control not to do, even when we want to, is sinful isn't it? I don't think babies can sin, because they lack the knowledge of right and wrong, and lack even basis self-control. But, my kids, who are 7 and 10 are well aware of what is right and what is wrong, and have the self-control to make the correct choices.

As are the dogs. Both of them exhibit self-control everytime they stop running and come to heel. They know right and wrong, because if they get out of their kennel and start to run out of the yard, but then see me, even if I don't say anything, they won't leave the yard. Or if they come up to the garden, even if the gate is open, they will turn back. I've watched both these dogs, as well as our 'senior citizen' dogs, look at me, look at a cow or just the sun-bathed mountains with a nice muddy pond near-by and make the conscience descision to either come to me, or run like the wind. You can literally watch them, as they stop, stand still, look at me, look to the hills, look back at me, and then either come when I call or take off. No one will ever convince me that they are not making a well thought out choice here. If you think dog's lack the capability of making such choices, you either don't have one, have a dumb one, or don't let your dog run free enough.

I could go on and explain just how the cats, cows, horses and rabbits also exhibit the same signs of intelligent, descision making capabilites. But, that would make the post way too long.

When we make claims that animals are not capable of sinning, are we operating on biblical knowledge, or just assuming something that all observations prove the contrary? Again, this isn't necessarily meant to be about whether or not animals have souls, but whether or not they have the capability to understand right from wrong, and make the choice to act upon that understanding.
 
Yes animals do have souls, that is why they have different personalities. Just like humans. The only thing though is that when they die, that is it.
 
Upon what do you base your opinion, Lewis? Is there any texts that we can read to understand more about what happens with animals? Or can we only make assumptions?
 
handy said:
Upon what do you base your opinion, Lewis? Is there any texts that we can read to understand more about what happens with animals? Or can we only make assumptions?
Yes it is in the book of Ecclesiastes, I forgot which chapter but Solomon says, who knoweth the spirit of a man that goeth upward, and the spirit of a beast that goeth downward. He is talking about their deaths. And he sure is not talking about the animals going to hell.

Ok I found it, I am using the The New King Jams Version.

Ecclesiastes 3:21
Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth?
 
Whether it's true or not, I truly believe that animals go to heaven and I will continue to believe that. Nobody knows for sure.
 
Nikki said:
Whether it's true or not, I truly believe that animals go to heaven and I will continue to believe that. Nobody knows for sure.
Ecclesiastes 3:21
Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth?
 
I believe animals have souls, and are very capable of rational thought.
Handy, you haven't met my cat opie. :-D

All kidding aside, if animals do go to heaven, I couldn't think of a better pet to spend eternity with, even if he is a pest sometimes. 8-)
 
I don't think that the Preacher is telling us that animals go to the ground and cease to exist. As a matter of fact, I think just the opposite. If you study the passage, it's clear he is making the point that we make a lot of assumptions regarding the souls of both men and animals.

I said to myself concerning the sons of men, "God has surely tested them in order for them to see that they are but beasts." For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of the beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vainty. All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to dust. Who knows that the breath of man ascends upward and the breath of the beast descends downward to the earth? Ecclesiastes 3:18-21

I believe the final question, "Who know that the breath of man ascends upward and the breath of the beast descends downward" to be a real question, not a statment of fact dressed up like a question. The whole of the context is a comparision of men and beasts, finding that they share the same fate of physical death, and that man has no particular advantage over the beasts in this respect. All will die. Who knows for sure what will happen to each spirit after the body dies?

If they just cease to exist, then why does God care whether or not a sparrow dies? (Matthew 10:29) Keep in mind that the context isn't just God's omnipresense, but that He is a God who cares deeply about His creation.

Where is the evidence that animals have souls?

The best evidence is in Genesis. Nephesh is the word used for creature in Genesis 1:20 and 1:21, referring to the water creatures; 1:24 referring to the land creatures; 1:30 for all living creatures. It's this same word, nephesh that is translated 'soul' in Genesis 2:7 which states: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Knowing that nephesh means what it does, I think it's quite clear from Genesis 1:30 that animals do indeed have souls.

Then God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding see; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth who has (nephesh), I have given every green plant for food."
 
I think this is a valid point. I know that we have a dog who we've had for eleven years and sometimes when she runs out to greet new people who are at the door or family members she already knows, and we call for her, she doesn't always listen to us, even though we'd taught her long ago to come when called. It could also be age, beings she eleven years old and all, but still, it can get a little fustrating to have her ignore us.

And I know it's not like she is doing it because she hates us. She's the most loving animal I've ever come in contact with. I love her to death myself, but she can be a tad naughty at times too.

So yes, I would agree animals can be a bit....naughty and not as innocent, just as the title of the thread would suggest. :D
 
If Jesus is coming back on a white horse, then I would assume that there are animals in heaven.

In my understanding, what is in the physical precedes the spiritual. You have trees, plants, bodies of water, etc. These are found in heaven. There will be a new earth and a new heaven, and I believe that the same concepts we are familiar with will remain in heavenly form; just in a glorified state.

Now I can't prove all of this, but if there is a tree of life, then it is fact there are trees, right? All I can do is appy common sense.
 
antitox said:
If Jesus is coming back on a white horse, then I would assume that there are animals in heaven.

*applaud!!!!*


I will continue to hold on to hope in my heart that animals go to heaven.
 
antitox said:
If Jesus is coming back on a white horse, then I would assume that there are animals in heaven.

In my understanding, what is in the physical precedes the spiritual. You have trees, plants, bodies of water, etc. These are found in heaven. There will be a new earth and a new heaven, and I believe that the same concepts we are familiar with will remain in heavenly form; just in a glorified state.

Now I can't prove all of this, but if there is a tree of life, then it is fact there are trees, right? All I can do is appy common sense.

Yes I already know that there are animals in heaven' but they are not like the animals of the earth. And they are on a higher order.
 
Lewis, thanks for the links. They were very interesing and I'm glad you posted several that provided balance to this discussion.

You know, I don't really think that animals will ever reside in heaven, for they were created to reside here on earth. I don't think we will reside in heaven either, for we too, were created to reside here on earth. I think our ultimate destination will be on the new earth, and I think the new earth will be simply this same one, with the curse of sin removed from it.

But, getting back to the basic question of this thread, do animals sin, I came across this verse while following up some of the verses provided in Lewis' links:

The ostriches' wings flap joyously with the pinion and plumage of love, for she abandons her eggs to the earth, and warms them in the dust. She forgets that a foot may crush them or that a wild beast may trample them. She treats her young cruelly, as if they were not hers; though her labor be in vain, she is unconcerned; Because God has made her forget wisdom, and has not giver her a share of understanding. Job 39:13-17

It's verses like these that are so intriguing. God made the ostrich forget wisdom: What does that mean? Why did God make the ostrich forget wisdom in the first place? Did it have to do with the effect of Adam's sin? If so, does that mean that the curse of sin applies to the animals as well as to humans, not just physical death, but a death of the soul as well?
 
handy what I get out of that, and it is something that I already knew. God denied certain animals intelligence, a ostrich is not a bright animal, nothing like a monkey or a dolphin. And that verse is talking about how dumb the ostrich is. And I am not saying that in a cruel way.
 
And another reason why animals are not to live forever' is this, the book of Genesis. God takes and kills a animal to cover Adam and Eve. Then Cain kills a animal to offer it to God. Then in Genesis 9, God tells us that everything that moveth will be food fo you.
 
True, but there are some things to consider regarding this.

First, yes, animals were the first to be sacrificed for sin, and remained the only acceptable sacrifice for sin until Jesus. However, if we think in terms of a sinless, blamless soul being sacrificed for the sins of others, doesn't that fit right in with the type and shadow of what Jesus did?

Secondly, Genesis 9 only further protrays the ravages that sin has brought on the earth. I believe the most simple reason why God gave the animals for food when they all got off of the ark, is that there wasn't any vegetation at that time. They would have need to wait until everything grew and came to fruition again. Naturally, God could have sustained them until the earth could have provided, but He obviously chose not to.

The thing is, the new earth will be free from the consequenses of sin. Therefore the animals and humans will all return back to what God created us to be in the first place: vegetarians.

So, I'm not sure we can settle the fact that animals of the new earth, those spoken of in Isaiah's prophesy, aren't simply the animals that live now and that go on to resurrection with their body in the new heaven and new earth like we do, just on the basis that God allowed us to eat them.

(Of course, I don't think we're going to 'settle' any facts on this issue anyway, it's just not clear enough from the Scriptures. But, it's interesting to chat about, which is why I put this in general talk, rather than apologetics. :wink: )

One thing that is interesting from Genesis 9:4 is that God made it very clear that while they could eat the flesh of the animals, they could not eat it's blood, because the blood represented it's life, which is that word nephesh again.

I think this is a key. In this verse, nephesh couldn't possibly refer to just the animal's life, for the animal is obviously physically dead if it's going to be eaten. Nephesh must take on the meaning of soul, and it's this that God commanded Noah never to eat.
 
Noah entered the ark in the 600th year of his life, on the 17th day of the 2nd month (Genesis 7:11-13). Noah left the ark on the 27th day of the 2nd month of the following year (Genesis 8:14-15). Therefore, assuming a lunar calendar of 360 days, Noah was on the ark for approximately 370 days.

But the Bible does not say how long they had been off of the Ark, when this command was given. Oh and also when Noha sent out the last dove' it returned with vegetation in it's mouth. Thats how Noah knew that the water was abating, and that' the earth was green again.
 
I had forgotten about that. I keep thinking that the world then was like the world now, and that one needed to wait until the crops were in. But, you're right,the world did have vegetation on it, at least what was needed to sustain the animals. Is there any record of animals being eaten for food prior to that?

This is an interesting discussion for me today in that we just got finished loading two of our heifers into the trailer to be taken down to the stockyards. With my father-in-law out of commission, we are going to have to sell off quite a bit of our herd. One of the heifers is a gentle little thing who quietly went right into the trailer. The other one is this huge onery heifer who wasn't having any of it. She was banging into my husband, thrashing around and spaying everyone quite liberally with... :oops:, well it all washes off. Anyway, it got me thinking again about this subject, how some animals just don't seem as 'innocent' as others. Maybe Star is just a lot more smarter than Lily.
 
Back
Top