Five Serious Questions About the Animals & God

[Sevenz]

Hello all of you fine folks,

I most definitely believe that God exists. And when I think about all the things that He has created it leaves me awestruck. The Bible says our creator is a God of love, and I believe it. However, there are some things about God that I just flat do not understand, and I am genuinely hoping that someone here on this forum can help me find the answers.

As for me, I am extremely fond of dogs. I presently have two of them. I literally LOVE them both, and I am moved to love God all the more because they are such a wonderful gift.

Now the primary question that I am seeking an answer to is this:
1) If the creator is a God of LOVE, then why did He give Noah and the rest of mankind permission to kill and eat animals?

I can't help but believe that all animals want to live, not die. So, this raises the following questions:
2) Did God originally intend for animals to live forever?
3) And if not, then why not?

A couple of additional questions that I have are as follows:
4) Can dogs display LOVE?
5) Do dogs possess a conscience?

I sincerely appreciate anyone who can help me with the above questions.

 

[JudgeRightly]

1) [Why did God] give Noah and the rest of mankind permission to kill and eat animals?

In terms of modern humans, vegetarians have a hard time getting the necessary nutrition they need for their bodies to function. Eating meat resolves those problems.

2) Did God originally intend for animals to live forever?

If not forever, then for a very long time.

3) And if not, then why not?

Relationships are the most important thing to God.

4) Can dogs display LOVE?

Love is probably too strong a word to use.

Affection would be more accurate.

5) Do dogs possess a conscience?

Dogs (and many other creatures) possess a soul (to a lesser extent that humans have a soul). It's how we can relate to (form relationships with) such animals, but not be able to relate to a bug or a plant.

They are not "conscious" in the same way humans are, but they certainly are aware of us.

 

[ttruscott]

Hello all of you fine folks,

I most definitely believe that God exists. And when I think about all the things that He has created it leaves me awestruck. The Bible says our creator is a God of love, and I believe it. However, there are some things about God that I just flat do not understand, and I am genuinely hoping that someone here on this forum can help me find the answers.

As for me, I am extremely fond of dogs. I presently have two of them. I literally LOVE them both, and I am moved to love God all the more because they are such a wonderful gift.

Now the primary question that I am seeking an answer to is this:
1) If the creator is a God of LOVE, then why did He give Noah and the rest of mankind permission to kill and eat animals?

I can't help but believe that all animals want to live, not die. So, this raises the following questions:
2) Did God originally intend for animals to live forever?
3) And if not, then why not?

A couple of additional questions that I have are as follows:
4) Can dogs display LOVE?
5) Do dogs possess a conscience?

I sincerely appreciate anyone who can help me with the above questions.

I also love my dogs but sinners can be loved, right?

Are animals sinful?
1. The serpent was said to be cunning in evil ABOVE the rest of the animals which implies they are sinful lite so to speak.

2. The serpent was cursed ABOVE the other animals which implies they got a lighter curse for their sin than the serpent got.

3. The animals were cursed by the flood along with mankind for their wickedness and violence, Gen 6:5-7.

 

[Derf]

Hello all of you fine folks,

Hello!

I most definitely believe that God exists. And when I think about all the things that He has created it leaves me awestruck. The Bible says our creator is a God of love, and I believe it.

Good way to start your post. Let's all give glory to God for His marvelous works!

However, there are some things about God that I just flat do not understand, and I am genuinely hoping that someone here on this forum can help me find the answers.

At least we can converse about them.and hopefully find answers. Some things about God we might never understand.

As for me, I am extremely fond of dogs. I presently have two of them. I literally LOVE them both, and I am moved to love God all the more because they are such a wonderful gift.

Dogs are certainly interesting creatures. I'm not as fond of them as you apparently are, partly because I see people loving their dogs more than people, it seems. Some seem to think it is better to have dogs than children. They bring them to church, and let them run wild, probably in the same way they see some do with their children and use it as a reason not to have children of their own. This seems topsy turvy to me.

Now the primary question that I am seeking an answer to is this:
1) If the creator is a God of LOVE, then why did He give Noah and the rest of mankind permission to kill and eat animals?

Because He loves mankind more than the animals.

 

[ok doser]

Hello all of you fine folks,

The Bible says our creator is a God of love

The Bible says a lot of things

Does God love sin?
Does God love disobedience?
Does God love evil?

 

[Derf]

And here all this time I thought you looked like Granny!

 

[Jefferson]

As for me, I am extremely fond of dogs. I presently have two of them. I literally LOVE them both, and I am moved to love God all the more because they are such a wonderful gift.

Over the decades I have thanked God dozens of times for creating dogs. He didn't have to bless us with such sweet companions.

 

[Derf]

Hello all of you fine folks,

I most definitely believe that God exists. And when I think about all the things that He has created it leaves me awestruck. The Bible says our creator is a God of love, and I believe it. However, there are some things about God that I just flat do not understand, and I am genuinely hoping that someone here on this forum can help me find the answers.

As for me, I am extremely fond of dogs. I presently have two of them. I literally LOVE them both, and I am moved to love God all the more because they are such a wonderful gift.

Now the primary question that I am seeking an answer to is this:
1) If the creator is a God of LOVE, then why did He give Noah and the rest of mankind permission to kill and eat animals?

I can't help but believe that all animals want to live, not die. So, this raises the following questions:
2) Did God originally intend for animals to live forever?
3) And if not, then why not?

A couple of additional questions that I have are as follows:
4) Can dogs display LOVE?
5) Do dogs possess a conscience?

I sincerely appreciate anyone who can help me with the above questions.

Do you think dogs go to heaven?

 

[ttruscott]

1) If the creator is a God of LOVE, then why did He give Noah and the rest of mankind permission to kill and eat animals?

Please consider that IF the reason we live here on earth with the weeds until we are holy enough for the weeds to be gathered and burnt without harm to us, Matthew 13:27-30: 27 The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’ 28 ‘An enemy did this,’ he replied. [a reference to verses 36-30]

So the servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’[to bring the judgement upon them?] 29 ‘NO!’ he said, [postpone the judgement because...] ‘if you pull the weeds now, you might uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest., then we must have our eyes opened to both our own sinfulness to bring us to repentance and to the eternal unforgivable evil of the reprobate weeds so we are ready to stand with GOD in all holiness in judgment of them.

One of HIS methods to do these things is to give us lives of suffering and death so that we can understand just how the natural consequences of sin impact us. In sin, things die, we die. In sin, to live means we must kill...iow, our lives depend on the death of something, ie, all food. What is considered to be natural is natural only to the world of sinners, not HIS nature.

IF you want life with no suffering or death then become holy and godly which will speed up, hasten, that terrible and great day of judgement when all evil and death is burnt away and only life remains: 2 Peter 3:1:11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness 12 as you anticipate and hasten, (speed up) the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat.

Do you think dogs go to heaven?

Some considerations:
1. IF GOD cannot create evil means that all evil people are only evil by their free will decision to rebel against HIM, then this implies that evil animals are also evil by a free will.

2. Then some animals should be able to be redeemed from their choice to be evil unless all animals have chosen by their free will to sin the unforgivable sin.

We know that Satan is seen as a serpent or dragon by metaphor but he is really a fallen angel, so it seems to me that it is possible that other fallen spirits can be shaped in physical life as animals, a physical metaphor so to speak, when the devil sows the people of the evil one into this world, Matthew 13:36-39.

I do not think that any other religion has any theological truth about the animals except that they are depressed by sin into a lower form.

 

[Idolater]

Do you think dogs go to heaven?

I don't see where anybody used the keys to the kingdom to bind pets from Heaven, so I'd suppose they are loosed.

 

[Derf]

I don't see where anybody used the keys to the kingdom to bind pets from Heaven, so I'd suppose they are loosed.

As an argument from the silence the opposite could just as easily be true...that no one used the keys of the kingdom to loose pets on earth, where they would then be loosed in heaven, so no dogs in heaven.

My point is that the standard you've chosen is not applicable to the topic.

 

[Derf]

Please consider that IF the reason we live here on earth with the weeds until we are holy enough for the weeds to be gathered and burnt without harm to us, Matthew 13:27-30: 27 The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’ 28 ‘An enemy did this,’ he replied. [a reference to verses 36-30]

So the servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’[to bring the judgement upon them?] 29 ‘NO!’ he said, [postpone the judgement because...] ‘if you pull the weeds now, you might uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest., then we must have our eyes opened to both our own sinfulness to bring us to repentance and to the eternal unforgivable evil of the reprobate weeds so we are ready to stand with GOD in all holiness in judgment of them.

One of HIS methods to do these things is to give us lives of suffering and death so that we can understand just how the natural consequences of sin impact us. In sin, things die, we die. In sin, to live means we must kill...iow, our lives depend on the death of something, ie, all food. What is considered to be natural is natural only to the world of sinners, not HIS nature.

IF you want life with no suffering or death then become holy and godly which will speed up, hasten, that terrible and great day of judgement when all evil and death is burnt away and only life remains: 2 Peter 3:1:11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness 12 as you anticipate and hasten, (speed up) the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat.


Some considerations:
1. IF GOD cannot create evil means that all evil people are only evil by their free will decision to rebel against HIM, then this implies that evil animals are also evil by a free will.

How can you tell an evil animal from a good one? I.e., where are the ten commandments for animals, and are they different for different species?

2. Then some animals should be able to be redeemed from their choice to be evil unless all animals have chosen by their free will to sin the unforgivable sin.

Interesting thought. For some reason, God thought it necessary for His son to become one of the type of creatures that He wanted to redeem. Does that mean that either Christ can't redeem animals because He's always from now on a human, or does He now need to cycle through being every type of animal in order to redeem each type? If the second is true, then He isn't forever the God-man, and He won't be able to mediate between God and man anymore.

We know that Satan is seen as a serpent or dragon by metaphor but he is really a fallen angel, so it seems to me that it is possible that other fallen spirits can be shaped in physical life as animals, a physical metaphor so to speak, when the devil sows the people of the evil one into this world, Matthew 13:36-39.

I do not think that any other religion has any theological truth about the animals except that they are depressed by sin into a lower form.

I'm not sure you are in a position to disparage other religions regarding theological truth, if I understand what you've written.

 

[ttruscott]

I'm not sure you are in a position to disparage other religions regarding theological truth, if I understand what you've written.

I presented scripture that animals were considered to be evil.
To prod a discussion I suggested that that may imply a free will.
I asked if their free will descent into sin might not imply they can be redeemed.

If you don't want to think about scripture most people hide their eyes from so be it. Jumping straight to absurdity suggests that you have no better idea about how to render these verses than I do.

When you suggest th esuperiority of Christianity over other religions you are being faithful. When I say they are wrong, I am being disparaging!

 

[JudgeRightly]

I presented scripture that animals were considered to be evil.

There is no indication in the verses you quoted that plants or animals can be evil.

To prod a discussion I suggested that that may imply a free will.
I asked if their free will descent into sin might not imply they can be redeemed.

Because animals (and for that matter, plants) are incapable of sin, there is no need to redeem them.

If you don't want to think about scripture most people hide their eyes from so be it. Jumping straight to absurdity suggests that you have no better idea about how to render these verses than I do.

Says the one who thinks that the verses he quoted somehow mean that plants and animals are capable of sinning.

When you suggest the superiority of Christianity over other religions you are being faithful. When I say they are wrong, I am being disparaging!

Not quite what he said.

 

[Idolater]

As an argument from the silence the opposite could just as easily be true...that no one used the keys of the kingdom to loose pets on earth, where they would then be loosed in heaven, so no dogs in heaven.

My point is that the standard you've chosen is not applicable to the topic.

If no one, not Catholic, not Orthodox, neither non-Catholic or non-Orthodox, iow no Christian authority, has ever used the keys of the kingdom to condemn pet-keeping, then it is loosed. The opposite therefore can't "just as easily be true."

 

[Derf]

If no one, not Catholic, not Orthodox, neither non-Catholic or non-Orthodox, iow no Christian authority, has ever used the keys of the kingdom to condemn pet-keeping, then it is loosed. The opposite therefore can't "just as easily be true."

Loosed from what? A sinful condition? Where do we see a sinful condition described for animals? And what are the ramifications? The closest I can find is the mandate given to Noah to kill any animal that kills a human. There you have the sin and the remedy, if that's what it is. Jesus Christ died to save His brother humans, but He never became brother to animals. Nor do we have any scripture that talks about resurrection of animals. Suggesting such is fine, but it's an argument from silence, just as your other argument was. And both arguments can be used the other way, and possibly not from silence. Animals die, we know that from experience. Salvation from death for animals is nowhere in the bible, so the most likely result is that they are NOT resurrected.

This topic is eerily (morbidly?) related to my thread on the meaning of "death", which you participated in.

 

[Derf]

I presented scripture that animals were considered to be evil.
To prod a discussion I suggested that that may imply a free will.

I continued the discussion; why are you upset about it?

I asked if their free will descent into sin might not imply they can be redeemed.

Sin implies redemption? Then Christ's sacrifice wasn't necessary, was it?

If you don't want to think about scripture most people hide their eyes from so be it. Jumping straight to absurdity suggests that you have no better idea about how to render these verses than I do.

We could argue over who jumped to absurdity sooner...

When you suggest th esuperiority of Christianity over other religions you are being faithful. When I say they are wrong, I am being disparaging!

Using what you've written, it's hard to know which is superior, since part of yours is not from the bible, but some other source.

 

[Idolater]

Loosed from what? A sinful condition? Where do we see a sinful condition described for animals? And what are the ramifications? The closest I can find is the mandate given to Noah to kill any animal that kills a human. There you have the sin and the remedy, if that's what it is. Jesus Christ died to save His brother humans, but He never became brother to animals. Nor do we have any scripture that talks about resurrection of animals. Suggesting such is fine, but it's an argument from silence, just as your other argument was. And both arguments can be used the other way, and possibly not from silence. Animals die, we know that from experience. Salvation from death for animals is nowhere in the bible, so the most likely result is that they are NOT resurrected.

This topic is eerily (morbidly?) related to my thread on the meaning of "death", which you participated in.

I'm trying to communicate that the practice of keeping pets has not been bound by any Christian authority figure as sin. I haven't been talking about the state of animals re souls or animal sin or whatnot. Therefore, keeping pets is loosed in Heaven as it is on Earth.

 

[Derf]

I'm trying to communicate that the practice of keeping pets has not been bound by any Christian authority figure as sin. I haven't been talking about the state of animals re souls or animal sin or whatnot. Therefore, keeping pets is loosed in Heaven as it is on Earth.

Oh, ok. It was in response to my question about whether dogs go to heaven, so perhaps you could understand my confusion.

Tell me where pharmaceutical transgenderism is bound on earth and therefore in heaven. I'm exempting physical mutilation, because I think scripture is clear on that point. If not bound, by your logic it is ok. What about cannibalism? (maybe that's a bad question to ask a Catholic). By your logic it's ok, as long as the eater didn't do the killing of the eatee.

But even if scripture is clear, why couldn't we use your logic to override scripture? Why couldn't we loose murder and theft and suicide and adultery? It seems a bad path to take.

What about disobedience to parents, or even disobedience to God?

 

[Idolater]

Oh, ok. It was in response to my question about whether dogs go to heaven, so perhaps you could understand my confusion.

That's what I was responding to, I'm saying that our deceased pets will or can be (if we want them) with us in Heaven /for all time.

Tell me where pharmaceutical transgenderism is bound on earth and therefore in heaven. I'm exempting physical mutilation, because I think scripture is clear on that point. If not bound, by your logic it is ok.

Wow, in the timeline of the Church this topic's about a hair's width old. We believe the keys are active today, so if the bishops take up the issue then we'll see what they do.

What about cannibalism? (maybe that's a bad question to ask a Catholic).

I don't know of any Christian leaders who haven't condemned, or wouldn't condemn if asked, indiscriminate cannibalism, am I missing something?

By your logic it's ok, as long as the eater didn't do the killing of the eatee.

But even if scripture is clear, why couldn't we use your logic to override scripture? Why couldn't we loose murder and theft and suicide and adultery? It seems a bad path to take.

That's never happened. If that were to happen then I'd be as concerned as you are, I'm not irrational.

What about disobedience to parents, or even disobedience to God?

What about it? The Catholic Church anyway clearly teaches to flee both, plus Catholicism endorses all the other explicit and explicitly current and valid for the Church, divine ethical strictures.