Are humans animals?

[Mike]

That is true, God is not going to resurrect animals. I have made many a pets out of my cows, and then ate them also when it was time and a need. Thats right , I ate my pets. But they were my cows and God made animals to be eaten by mankind.

Oh my gosh, I just spit out my pop!

Outstanding, Mysteryman!!!

 

[happyjoy]

Of course I'd pick the vet, but that doesn't prove your point. Nor does your post explain why you think that if someone believes that we are the pinnacle of God's creation, then they must somehow also believe that the earth is at the center of the universe. I'm only asking that because you keep bringing it up and I don't understand the correlation...simply because it was a popular belief in the past.

Yes because it was popular in the past. Science and education are good. We should not deny the obvious because it religious leaders uncomfortable. The fact we are animals is one of those things.

 

[happyjoy]

Happyjoy, on that note, so that we are clear. what is the point of this thread?

To show that superstition pervades modern Christianity, it seems many Christian leaders want us to go back into another dark ages, or to live with the same disdain for education that the Muslims have. Secondly to prove them wrong. Many people like to argue about evolution and such, but that is too complex. Are we an animal is easy to understand, and shown to be true.

Glorification of ignorance is just plain wrong. There is nothing immoral about studying Biology, Chemistry, Geology, Physics or any other science. The truth is the truth.

Blaming God for earthquakes or other such stuff is superstition. We know what causes earthquakes, and volcanoes etc.

i have noticed some clashing, and that was cleared up.
on biological note we have things in common with an animal but we are made to be more.
does a dog have morals like we do/
does a lion care about the prey in that it keeps the herd it uses for food in check and allows the culled herd to regpopulate?
does any of the wolves care or take notice that the eviroment needs the caribou and so on?

who has that charge?

if so why? and who gave us that responsibility. did men or the creator from above?

Do animals have morals? That is a complex question that isn't easy to answer. There have been cases where animals have adopted and raised the abandoned babies of other species. There are cases of humans being raised by wolves and apes. So there must be some sort of morality there, but animals live in a state of nature that we no longer do, and their instincts mostly determine their behavior. Also, animals don't have the cognitive abilities we do so we can't expect much.

 

[jasoncran]

Here we go. so you seem assume that we have "superstitions".

so by what authority do you tell me that rape is evil, when animals do that? some sex between species is violent and ends with one of partners dead(praying mantis)
by what authouriyt do you tell me that abortion is evil, when a sow will eats it own if not touched by human hands
by what definition is morality if we base it on nature.

some animals are cannibalistic.


Do you want us to change our views to the humanistic world view? where theres no thruth but this all truth is relative and we know that God doesnt exist.
no thanks.

 

[happyjoy]

Here we go. so you seem assume that we have "superstitions".

so by what authority do you tell me that rape is evil, when animals do that? some sex between species is violent and ends with one of partners dead(praying mantis)
by what authouriyt do you tell me that abortion is evil, when a sow will eats it own if not touched by human hands
by what definition is morality if we base it on nature.

some animals are cannibalistic.


Do you want us to change our views to the humanistic world view? where theres no thruth but this all truth is relative and we know that God doesnt exist.
no thanks.

No I don't anyone to think rape isn't evil or that there is no God. That is silly. I think a Christian can use common sense. We are animals. Science isn't evil. God doesn't cause tornadoes or earthquakes.

 

[Mysteryman]

Here we go. so you seem assume that we have "superstitions".

so by what authority do you tell me that rape is evil, when animals do that? some sex between species is violent and ends with one of partners dead(praying mantis)
by what authouriyt do you tell me that abortion is evil, when a sow will eats it own if not touched by human hands
by what definition is morality if we base it on nature.

some animals are cannibalistic.


Do you want us to change our views to the humanistic world view? where theres no thruth but this all truth is relative and we know that God doesnt exist.
no thanks.

No I don't anyone to think rape isn't evil or that there is no God. That is silly. I think a Christian can use common sense. We are animals. Science isn't evil. God doesn't cause tornadoes or earthquakes.

You started this thread, and as of yet have not provided any scripture to support your view. You keep claiming that humans are animals. And I am sure that you are not alone on this. But at least some gave biblical references to support their view. Even though they are still wrong and in error. At the very least I also gave a biblical supportive view that we are not animals.

Yet, you talk about God, but you prefer being referenced as an animal more than a person whom God created in his own image. I guess what I am saying, is that I just don't get it, nor do I understand the path of your reasoning.

 

[Mysteryman]

Quote happyjoy: "God doesn't cause tornadoes or earthquakes."


Hi

Oh really ? You don't believe that God causes earthquakes ? Even if the Word of God states otherwise ?

 

[happyjoy]

Quote happyjoy: "God doesn't cause tornadoes or earthquakes."


Hi

Oh really ? You don't believe that God causes earthquakes ? Even if the Word of God states otherwise ?

Correct. God does not cause earthquakes. God didn't cause the one in Haiti or Japan, or California. That is superstitions thinking.

http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/ASK/earthquakes.html

Subject: What causes earthquakes?

What causes earthquakes?

The short answer is that earthquakes are caused by faulting, a sudden lateral or vertical movement of rock along a rupture (break) surface.
Here's the longer answer: The surface of the Earth is in continuous slow motion. This is plate tectonics--the motion of immense rigid plates at the surface of the Earth in response to flow of rock within the Earth. The plates cover the entire surface of the globe. Since they are all moving they rub against each other in some places (like the San Andreas Fault in California), sink beneath each other in others (like the Peru-Chile Trench along the western border of South America), or spread apart from each other (like the Mid-Atlantic Ridge). At such places the motion isn't smooth--the plates are stuck together at the edges but the rest of each plate is continuing to move, so the rocks along the edges are distorted (what we call "strain"). As the motion continues, the strain builds up to the point where the rock cannot withstand any more bending. With a lurch, the rock breaks and the two sides move. An earthquake is the shaking that radiates out from the breaking rock.
People have known about earthquakes for thousands of years, of course, but they didn't know what caused them. In particular, people believed that the breaks in the Earth's surface--faults--which appear after earthquakes, were caused *by* the earthquakes rather than the cause *of* them. It was Bunjiro Koto, a geologist in Japan studying a 60-mile long fault whose two sides shifted about 15 feet in the great Japanese earthquake of 1871, who first suggested that earthquakes were caused by faults. Henry Reid, studying the great San Francisco earthquake of 1906, took the idea further. He said that an earthquake is the huge amount of energy released when accumulated strain causes a fault to rupture. He explained that rock twisted further and further out of shape by continuing forces over the centuries eventually yields in a wrenching snap as the two sides of the fault slip to a new position to relieve the strain. This is the idea of "elastic rebound" which is now central to all studies of fault rupture.

Dr. Gerard Fryer
Hawaii Institute of Geophysics & Planetology
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822

 

[stovebolts]

Hi Jeff

Do me a favor, and look up Gen.7:22 - the word "breath" is the Hebrew word "ruach" < this word is translated also - spirit. But it means - breath - or wind

Now look up Job 37:10 and the word "breath" is the Hebrew word - "neshamah"

Now look up Psalm 150:6 - "Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord, Praise ye the Lord" < Here the word "breath" is the same Hebrew word "neshamah"

The word for "soul" is - nephesh

Animals do not have souls ! They have "breath" - "ruach"

Hello Hervey,

I believe it was C.S. Lewis that said, "I do not have a soul, I AM a soul".
So you are correct. Animals do not have souls, for they are souls.

Let me clarify this one more time for you, just so scripture is clear.
I have truncated strongs.

2416. chay
from 2421; alive;

Strongs 5315. nephesh
from 5314; properly, a breathing creature, i.e. animal of (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense

Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth chay nephesh after their kinds, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kinds: and it was so.

Genesis 2:7 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 chay nephesh.

Breath of life is a whole other matter, but you will find that all chay nephesh have the breath of life...

Now then, to the matter of ruach. You are not understanding the simplest of things as it pertains to the soul, how are you then going to understand the deeper things within scripture as it relates to the ruach, for all nephesh's have a ruach.

Simply put, God's neshama is in all nephesh's. It's what gives all nephesh's ruach. When God speaks, his neshama is present. Search the scriptures, for you will find that the pneuma and the ruach are one.

I'm fearful that you are forcing scripture to say that which it does not say to afford the fancy to which you have written about earlier both in this topic as well as other topics. Allow the scriptures to tell the story as it was meant to be told and you will find many fine jewels.

 

[saintjim]

Hi Handy
I see I live north of nowhere lol
The Inerrant Book and Paul I think, does say somewhere that ALL of creation is waiting for the full redemption that Christ will bring -so it is a great hope and certainty.
If the Bible is a little bit wrong then it is a whole lot wrong- Chuck Missler in Youtube discusses scientifically its inerrantcy- very interesting as he has experience in quantum mechanics and a wide knowledge spectrum
He did tell his daughter that there will be cats in Heaven as where else would they get the gut for the harp strings? lol
I will be riding a horse with my friends:D
As far as earth quakes go He can use events from the fall or initiate them for His own purpose as a study of the record in the Bible shows because
He it is in whom we live and move and have our being - he is not up on a cloud somewhere working on a beard
book of Job is worth going through.
God justice does demand payment for all mens sins from the fall so He is looking for redemptive blood which we cannot supply as we brought in the curse in the garden but thankfully he supplied it in Gethsemane- the innocent for the guilty in Christ so that we might have fellowship with the unapproachable father PSL
Jewish sages said
there are no coincidences in God's creation!
But the natural fallen man cannot receive the things of the spirit- they are blinded to Him untill he goes to the cross and avails himself of what the blood bought

sj

I am hoping for a reunion with all my pets in the resurrection life to come in New Jerusalem- not to mention the Lord and the Saints and my family known and unknown
great hope what
1000 years of living and reigning with the Lord on the planet and in space
shalom
sj

I have the same hope, saintjim. While I fully understand that the Scriptures do not address the issue of the resurrection of specific animals (ie Kitty-Kitty as opposed to cats in general), I think that to fully and completely be victorious all death and all sin, then the individual animals must be resurrected as well. After all, their death was only because of the sin of Adam, they were innocent victims of death.

But, that really is conjecture, not something to divide over to be sure. But, yes, I have that hope as well. I've lost a lot of pets over the years and hope to see them in the New Earth. :yes

I do believe the bible is fully inspired and wholly without error. (I don't view things such as the age of Josiah as an error as much as a "typo".) I also embrace science, and find few if any conflicts between my faith and science. This is mainly because I view science as only explaining the "mechanics" of things, not the meaning of things. In those few areas in which scientific theory directly conflicts with clear Scriptural teaching, I side with Scriptures, recognizing that a lot of what passes for Scientific Theory are really held to for social and political reasons, rather than purely scientific reasons.

In the case of animals, there is a lot we simply don't know regarding God's truth about them. This is mainly because we only know God's truth via the Bible, and the purpose of the Bible is to reveal God's truth in regards to His redemptive plan for sinful man. The animals really don't come into the redemptive plan all that much, because they don't sin. We do know that they were saved in the same symbolic "baptismal" waters of the Flood via the Ark, so we do know that God's plan is to redeem the animals as well as man. But, the Bible concerns itself mainly with man.

 

[stovebolts]

Not Jeff here, MM, but since you're looking up things, you might want to look up both Genesis 1:24 and Genesis 2:7. You find it as I mentioned before, both the animals and man are "chay nephesh": living souls.

Now, I really, REALLY must get off this computer and correct my daughter's math. She's working on a paper on the Declaration of Independence, so I've had some fun discussion and debate, but I've gotta sign off now.

Hi

Genesis 1:24 is the only verse that needs to be addressed here. The "only" time that "nephesh" is used pertianing to a living creature, is when it is translated the word "creature". And then it is used only nine times. Its translated "appetite" twice. Its tranlsated "any" four times. Its translated "desire" five times. Its translated "pleasure" four times. Its translated "fish" once. Its translated "mind" 15 times. And it is translated "soul" 428 times, and not once where it was translated "soul" does it refer to any beast or creature, not once.

The reason it is "chaiyah nephesh", is because it is just refering to that which has "life"

false dichotomy...

In another thread you wrote...

Our translations are not the Spirit of truth ! Those who have the Spirit of Truth will understand the truth. Those who rely upon their translations for everything, will come away with what only their physical eyes see .

 

[saintjim]

This is about beaten to death wouldant you say?

Not Jeff here, MM, but since you're looking up things, you might want to look up both Genesis 1:24 and Genesis 2:7. You find it as I mentioned before, both the animals and man are "chay nephesh": living souls.

Now, I really, REALLY must get off this computer and correct my daughter's math. She's working on a paper on the Declaration of Independence, so I've had some fun discussion and debate, but I've gotta sign off now.

Hi

Genesis 1:24 is the only verse that needs to be addressed here. The "only" time that "nephesh" is used pertianing to a living creature, is when it is translated the word "creature". And then it is used only nine times. Its translated "appetite" twice. Its tranlsated "any" four times. Its translated "desire" five times. Its translated "pleasure" four times. Its translated "fish" once. Its translated "mind" 15 times. And it is translated "soul" 428 times, and not once where it was translated "soul" does it refer to any beast or creature, not once.

The reason it is "chaiyah nephesh", is because it is just refering to that which has "life"

false dichotomy...

In another thread you wrote...

Our translations are not the Spirit of truth ! Those who have the Spirit of Truth will understand the truth. Those who rely upon their translations for everything, will come away with what only their physical eyes see .

 

[Mysteryman]

Hi Jeff

Do me a favor, and look up Gen.7:22 - the word "breath" is the Hebrew word "ruach" < this word is translated also - spirit. But it means - breath - or wind

Now look up Job 37:10 and the word "breath" is the Hebrew word - "neshamah"

Now look up Psalm 150:6 - "Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord, Praise ye the Lord" < Here the word "breath" is the same Hebrew word "neshamah"

The word for "soul" is - nephesh

Animals do not have souls ! They have "breath" - "ruach"

Hello Hervey,

I believe it was C.S. Lewis that said, "I do not have a soul, I AM a soul".
So you are correct. Animals do not have souls, for they are souls.

Let me clarify this one more time for you, just so scripture is clear.
I have truncated strongs.

2416. chay
from 2421; alive;

Strongs 5315. nephesh
from 5314; properly, a breathing creature, i.e. animal of (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense

Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth chay nephesh after their kinds, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kinds: and it was so.

Genesis 2:7 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 chay nephesh.

Breath of life is a whole other matter, but you will find that all chay nephesh have the breath of life...

Now then, to the matter of ruach. You are not understanding the simplest of things as it pertains to the soul, how are you then going to understand the deeper things within scripture as it relates to the ruach, for all nephesh's have a ruach.

Simply put, God's neshama is in all nephesh's. It's what gives all nephesh's ruach. When God speaks, his neshama is present. Search the scriptures, for you will find that the pneuma and the ruach are one.

I'm fearful that you are forcing scripture to say that which it does not say to afford the fancy to which you have written about earlier both in this topic as well as other topics. Allow the scriptures to tell the story as it was meant to be told and you will find many fine jewels.

Hi Jeff

Lets look at Gen. 1:24 first shall we ? In Gen. 1:24 it states "after its kinds" - Now put this in reference to a certain beast or cattle. A dog for instance, also has "rauch" which is translated -"breath" . or "spirit" . The word "creature" means - "chaiyah nephesh" means - "life". So what Gen. 1:24 is saying, is that the "life" of a dog after its kind. The "spirit" of a dog, is the breath of a dog. Which means a dog "barks" to express itself when the need arises in its understanding.

Now Gen. 2:7 - Man, like the beast has "life", but the life of a man is after its kind as well. For man was man in the image of God. God breathed "neshamah" into the nostriles of man, and man became a living soul . The word "living" is "chai" and the word - "soul" is - 'nephesh". The word "neshamah" means two things - 1. spirit 2. breath. < This spirit breath is from above - God. So we speak with the reasoning from above after our own kind. The spirit of man gives us the reasoning to speak what God reveals unto us. For instance, Adam named all the animals. He received his reasoning from above of what to call each individual beast, cattle or creeping thing. Man was formed from the dust of the ground, but the breath breathed into man was from above. God spoke to man - spirit to spirit , to the understanding of man. Once God explained something to mankind, mankind could understand what God was telling them. When God talked to Cain, before he slew his brother Abel. God told him in Gen. 4:6 and 7 something that Cain could understand within his reasoning.

Animals do not have a soul, they have life of its own kind. Mankind does have a soul, that can sin and it is the soul ( nephesh ) that needed redemption. When mankind sins, they sin after its own kind, which is God. In Gen. 1:26 , we read -- "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" < the image and likeness is not after the beasts of the field, nor cattle, nor creeping things. But after the heavenly. Our physical make up, and our ability to speak with reason is the image and likeness from above. So when mankind dies, the spirit of man goes back to the giver who gave it - God. This seperates us from any other living creature on earth.

Bless

 

[stovebolts]

Hervey,
I think we're about done here...

 

[Mike]

happyjoy, admittedly, I jumped into this thread a few days ago, and didn't read through the whole thing in between your beginning and where I stepped in. So if someone said something you are specifically responding to, I didn't see it.

You've said several times that Christians shouldn't be afraid of learning, education and science. I can't imagine anyone is, unless a biased scientist is mishandling his study to contradict our faith. If they are wrong with out being bias, that's another consideration. We should look into it thoroughly to become aware of its inaccuracies. Our Christian faith is definitely not mutually exclusive with learning or being educated.

Somewhere the conversation veered off to natural catastrophes. The Bible is filled with scripture specifically stating that God brought on events that occur on His created world. A lot in Genesis, and if He can create it, why wouldn't He be able to manipulate it by orchestrating the chain of events that lead to catastrophes. Besides Genesis, you have Jonah, a lot in the Psalms, Acts and many others that specify God's Hand in these. My guess is these would be among the many things in which the Bible is in error.

 

[happyjoy]

You've said several times that Christians shouldn't be afraid of learning, education and science. I can't imagine anyone is, unless a biased scientist is mishandling his study to contradict our faith.

Some science does contradict a lot of what is being taught in Christianity today. A biology, or human physiology professor certainly teaches we are animals. A chemistry professor teaches the decay of atoms that are used to date the earth as far older than six thousand years. A geologist also teaches that the earth is far older than six thousand years, and he teaches that earthquakes are not a supernatural phenomenon, but are caused by plate tectonics.

Note I am saying science contradicts some Christian theology. I am not saying there is no God or Jesus.

 

[handy]

You've said several times that Christians shouldn't be afraid of learning, education and science. I can't imagine anyone is, unless a biased scientist is mishandling his study to contradict our faith.

Some science does contradict a lot of what is being taught in Christianity today. A biology, or human physiology professor certainly teaches we are animals. A chemistry professor teaches the decay of atoms that are used to date the earth as far older than six thousand years. A geologist also teaches that the earth is far older than six thousand years, and he teaches that earthquakes are not a supernatural phenomenon, but are caused by plate tectonics.

Note I am saying science contradicts some Christian theology. I am not saying there is no God or Jesus.

Let's say that I'm going to bake a cake. I mix together some eggs, oil, flour, sugar, cocoa, milk and water. I pour the batter into a pan, pop it in the oven, and bake it at about 350 for about 25 minutes.

Did I bake a cake? Sure I did.

But, did I really? Wasn't it the chemical reaction caused by mixing various ingredients in the proper proportions and exposing them to heat that really baked the cake?

Yeah, that's what happened too.

Point being that plate tectonics certainly explain how earthquakes happen. Solar activities explain global warming too. Human beings have a biological make-up.

But, this doesn't mean that God isn't in control or is in effect causing these things.

Now, I happen to believe that sometimes an earthquake is just an earthquake. But, we do know that God can cause the plates to move, and sometimes it is His specific will that certain plates will move at certain times. We also know that whether the plates move simply because that's the nature of the world He created, or because He nudged a plate, it is all under His sovereign control. If He determines He doesn't want a particular plate to move, then it won't move.

None of this is provable by science. But, we can know this is true via God's word.

 

[happyjoy]

Some science does contradict a lot of what is being taught in Christianity today. A biology, or human physiology professor certainly teaches we are animals. A chemistry professor teaches the decay of atoms that are used to date the earth as far older than six thousand years. A geologist also teaches that the earth is far older than six thousand years, and he teaches that earthquakes are not a supernatural phenomenon, but are caused by plate tectonics.

Note I am saying science contradicts some Christian theology. I am not saying there is no God or Jesus.

Let's say that I'm going to bake a cake. I mix together some eggs, oil, flour, sugar, cocoa, milk and water. I pour the batter into a pan, pop it in the oven, and bake it at about 350 for about 25 minutes.

Did I bake a cake? Sure I did.

But, did I really? Wasn't it the chemical reaction caused by mixing various ingredients in the proper proportions and exposing them to heat that really baked the cake?

Yeah, that's what happened too.

Point being that plate tectonics certainly explain how earthquakes happen. Solar activities explain global warming too. Human beings have a biological make-up.

But, this doesn't mean that God isn't in control or is in effect causing these things.

Now, I happen to believe that sometimes an earthquake is just an earthquake. But, we do know that God can cause the plates to move, and sometimes it is His specific will that certain plates will move at certain times. We also know that whether the plates move simply because that's the nature of the world He created, or because He nudged a plate, it is all under His sovereign control. If He determines He doesn't want a particular plate to move, then it won't move.

None of this is provable by science. But, we can know this is true via God's word.

Well I think that all the posturing that God caused such and such catastrophe is largely based on superstition, and the rest are con men taking advantage of tragedy.

Earthquakes and volcanoes are natural phenomenon.

There is a thread in current events about some "prophet" who predicts an earthquake in Namibia Africa. Really? No specific date just a vague prediction like a horoscope. Well Namibia lies on an active fault. Of course they are going to have an earthquake.

I predict that there will be a volcanic eruption on one of the Hawaiian islands before the year is out. Does that make me a profit too? Does that make Hawaii a sinner state being judged by God?

 

[handy]

I don't want to ignore what's true just because there are a lot of liars out there.

Are there false prophets and false teachers making claims about God that aren't true.

Well yeah, and God make it perfectly clear in His word that this would be the case.

There have been a ton of bogus scientists out there as well. How many claims about "take these scientifically proven pills Dr. Soandso, MD created and you'll lose all your extra weight in 3 weeks" are out there? I'm sure that you don't discount all credible scientists because of the quacks, and neither should you discount all credible teachers and prophets because of the apostates.

 

[happyjoy]

I don't want to ignore what's true just because there are a lot of liars out there.

Are there false prophets and false teachers making claims about God that aren't true.

Well yeah, and God make it perfectly clear in His word that this would be the case.

There have been a ton of bogus scientists out there as well. How many claims about "take these scientifically proven pills Dr. Soandso, MD created and you'll lose all your extra weight in 3 weeks" are out there? I'm sure that you don't discount all credible scientists because of the quacks, and neither should you discount all credible teachers and prophets because of the apostates.

Oh yeah there are tons of outright bogus scientific claims, and pseudo science out there, but science has developed a very good process to debunk those claims. One need only go to any accredited university to find the truth of what science actually says.

Where does one go to find out what a true Christian believes?