So, according to The Bible, what happens to animals after they die?

[fhios]

I'm asking this question to anyone with enough knowledge of the text of the bible and/or its more common and or intelligent interpretations: Did God create all the animals of the world simply to have them die in pain? I really don't mean this as a challenge to Christians in any way. I'm simply curious to know.

[Lord Kenneth]

In Catholic school I was taught that animals were put on earth for human use, and that they do not have souls, and thus will not go to heaven.

[fhios]

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth
In Catholic school I was taught that animals were put on earth for human use, and that they do not have souls, and thus will not go to heaven.

Does it mention any other possibilities for their happiness?

[TruthSeeker]

When my cat died, an evangelical friend said that she would be waiting in heaven for me since, for me, heaven would be incomplete without her.

So, I guess this means that beloved animals get into heaven.

Although Disney would add that "All dogs go to heaven"

[Yahweh]

I cant wait to meet good ol' Adolf in Heaven...

[Ratman_tf]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker


Although Disney would add that "All dogs go to heaven"

I think you mean Don Bluth. ;)

[Ruby]

Originally posted by fhios
I'm asking this question to anyone with enough knowledge of the text of the bible and/or its more common and or intelligent interpretations: Did God create all the animals of the world simply to have them die in pain? I really don't mean this as a challenge to Christians in any way. I'm simply curious to know.

Some Christians say animals have no souls and therefore will not go to heaven when they die. Others disagree and believe that God will have all our beloved (deceased) pets in heaven waiting for us.

The bible does not say an animal has a soul...........as far as I know............and I can't think of any passage of an animal going to heaven.

[Yahweh]

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/pets.shtml

According to that article, it appears that animals dont go to Heaven, they also dont appear to be going to Hell either.

From the article:
Obviously, what God has prepared for us is wonderful beyond comprehension. Therefore, love your pets as much as you can while they are here. Those of us who go to heaven will later understand that everything worked out perfectly regarding our pets.
I dont know what to make of that except possibly it refers to the fact that humans will eventually go extinct (or go to Heaven if you want to put "god" into the equation), the rest of the animals will reclaim ownership of the earth. So it all works out.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by fhios
Did God create all the animals of the world simply to have them die in pain?
The Biblical perspective is that animals don't feel pain, because they don't have souls.

Descartes taught the same thing: animals are merely automatons that are programmed to act as if they feel pain. But since they do not have a soul, they do not have a mind, and thus they cannot suffer.

Descartes, to say the least, was chock full of nuts. But the Christian perspective requires us to ignore any evidence that indicates that man is merely an animal, or even shares with animals any part of what makes us special - like a sense of justice. (See my monkey thread!)

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Yahzi
The Biblical perspective is that animals don't feel pain, because they don't have souls.

Descartes taught the same thing: animals are merely automatons that are programmed to act as if they feel pain. But since they do not have a soul, they do not have a mind, and thus they cannot suffer.

Descartes, to say the least, was chock full of nuts. But the Christian perspective requires us to ignore any evidence that indicates that man is merely an animal, or even shares with animals any part of what makes us special - like a sense of justice. (See my monkey thread!)
Humans, always so arrogant. Not only does everything revolve around the earth, only humans feel pain and get into heaven...

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Yahweh
I cant wait to meet good ol' Adolf in Heaven...

Oh Weee! Look at his little mustache! What a cute kitty. :)

[Martin]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
When my cat died, an evangelical friend said that she would be waiting in heaven for me since, for me, heaven would be incomplete without herFascinating. And yet - if you suggest to this person that heaven would be incomplete without, say, your beloved non-Christian partner, you'd get quite a different answer.

[Interesting Ian]

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth
In Catholic school I was taught that animals were put on earth for human use, and that they do not have souls, and thus will not go to heaven.

How utterly ludicrous! :rolleyes:

[Interesting Ian]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
When my cat died, an evangelical friend said that she would be waiting in heaven for me since, for me, heaven would be incomplete without her.

So, I guess this means that beloved animals get into heaven.

Although Disney would add that "All dogs go to heaven"

Some people who undergo NDE's encounter their deceased pets.

[TruthSeeker]

Originally posted by Ratman_tf


I think you mean Don Bluth. ;)


I stand corrected. It is an MGM movie (http://www.mgm.com/mgm/survey/try1.php) . Don Bluth is the director.

I blame my young nephew who has it on the same shelf as the Disney flicks. I shall deal with him and his sloppy movie filing tomorrow :)

[TruthSeeker]

Originally posted by Yahweh
I cant wait to meet good ol' Adolf in Heaven...


Adolf is charming. Without the distinctive mustache, he looks very much like my Taylor.

[TruthSeeker]

Originally posted by Martinm
Fascinating. And yet - if you suggest to this person that heaven would be incomplete without, say, your beloved non-Christian partner, you'd get quite a different answer.


You must be psychic!

I did ask about this because my partner is an atheist. (I'm more of a "seeker" at this point, hence the handle)

Response: Partner had a choice and used his free will to reject God (and indirectly reject his chance to spend eternity with those he loves) and earn damnation

Kitty had no choice.

My next point was that this seemed unfair as I was being punished with a less than complete heaven because of a choice my partner made independent of me.

Response: during our years together, I should have helped my partner move towards god. That I did not will be part of the judgment against me.

So, my ticket to heaven may soon be null and void because of my critical skeptical partner (Thanks alot, love). As a result of my damnation, poor kitty will not be going to heaven and my loved ones will be a little less happy for missing me. Although if they don't try to lead me back, they may well end up with me and my partner in hell.

Imagine the fun we'll have at the barbeques:D

[Darwin]

I thought it was clearly defined.Animals (non-human) does not have a chance,they´ll just lay down and decay.
It also seems to be trendy among middle-eastern religions to refer to animals as filthy or unworthy.

From a discussion I had with a person who remains anonymous;
Darwin:"Humans are but one species of animal...etc.".
The person in question:"NO! Humans were made by God! Humans have a soul!".
The same person also felt that JW´s do not represent christianity,saying that JW´s believe that people "die like animals" or something like that (that is,no heaven and afterlife.Keep in mind that this is not my data,and I think what was referred to was JW´s idea about non-believers).

Should I consider that kind of thinking pathological,I would hand out "expressions of emotions in man and animals" as medicine.

[zakur]

Here's Aquinas' view, from Summa Theologica: Whether the souls of brute animals are subsistent? (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/107503.htm) and Whether the plants and animals will remain in this renewal? (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/509105.htm)On the contrary, Is what is written in the book De Eccl. Dogm. xvi, xvii: "Man alone we believe to have a subsistent soul: whereas the souls of animals are not subsistent." And for some more Catholic opinion, see the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on Cruelty to Animals (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04542a.htm).Catholic ethics has been criticized by some zoophilists because it refuses to admit that animals have rights. But it is indisputable that, when properly understood and fairly judged, Catholic doctrine -- though it does not concede rights to the brute creation -- denounces cruelty to animals as vigorously and as logically as do those moralists who make our duty in this respect the correlative of a right in the animals.

In order to establish a binding obligation to avoid the wanton infliction of pain on the brutes, it is not necessary to acknowledge any right inherent in them. Our duty in this respect is part of our duty towards God. From the juristic standpoint the visible world with which man comes in contact is divided into persons and non-persons. For the latter term the word "things" is usually employed. Only a person, that is, a being possessed of reason and self-control, can be the subject of rights and duties; or, to express the same idea in terms more familiar to adherents of other schools of thought, only beings who are ends in themselves, and may not be treated as mere means to the perfection of other beings, can possess rights. Rights and duties are moral ties which can exist only in a moral being, or person. Beings that may be treated simply as means to the perfection of persons can have no rights, and to this category the brute creation belongs. In the Divine plan of the universe the lower creatures are subordinated to the welfare of man.

[shemp]

Every animal you ever ate comes back and feeds upon you eternally.

[Checkmite]

The bantering of various historical theologians aside; I believe the original question included the qualifier "according to the bible".

The question cannot be answered, because the bible simply doesn't say what happens to animals when they die, whether they have a soul, etc. It's all assumption.

[Peskanov]

Well, there some references about the nature of animals in the bible;
Animals are mostly used for sacrifice in the old testament; it seems Yahve apreciated this kind of gifts a lot. Bigger animals gave extra points.

In Mark 5:2 we can read how Jesus send some demons souls into a herd of pigs.
Then, the pigs kill themselves drowning in the sea.

You can get some conclussions about old Jew beliefs there:
- Animals can be posessed by souls.
- Yahve don't give a **** about animal wellfare. Like humans, then :D

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
I did ask about this because my partner is an atheist. (I'm more of a "seeker" at this point, hence the handle)

Response: Partner had a choice and used his free will to reject God (and indirectly reject his chance to spend eternity with those he loves) and earn damnation
I usually give this answer:

If God made me the way I am, then he designed me so I am absolutely incapable of believing in him. He also made me so I cannot under any circumstance accept "faith" as any kind of reasoning. So, ummm, I guess he designed me without any chance of salvation... what kind of God would do that to his own child?

(Maybe, just as a spite, I might ask if his concept of God is the correct one :p)

[Leif Roar]

Originally posted by Yahweh

I usually give this answer:

If God made me the way I am, then he designed me so I am absolutely incapable of believing in him. He also made me so I cannot under any circumstance accept "faith" as any kind of reasoning. So, ummm, I guess he designed me without any chance of salvation... what kind of God would do that to his own child?


Well, just to play the devil's advocate here - how about: "You are wrong about your capability to believe in God."

[fhios]

Originally posted by Yahzi

The Biblical perspective is that animals don't feel pain, because they don't have souls.

Descartes taught the same thing: animals are merely automatons that are programmed to act as if they feel pain. But since they do not have a soul, they do not have a mind, and thus they cannot suffer.

Descartes, to say the least, was chock full of nuts. But the Christian perspective requires us to ignore any evidence that indicates that man is merely an animal, or even shares with animals any part of what makes us special - like a sense of justice. (See my monkey thread!)

Speaking as a man with two dogs (both hybrids!), two cats and two especially beloved ferrets, let me tell you: those poor things do feel pain. To say otherwise is a good example of violating Occam's Razor, the topic of another thread now current. As evidence, I cite the adorable (but so poorly named) Sneezer with his long history of illness, and his nearly comical determination to avoid medicine. He would screw up his face very tightly, and, when I would yawn to induce yawning in him (ferrets are very susceptible to the power of suggestion) he would simply hold his eyes, nose and mouth all the more tightly closed.

[fhios]

Originally posted by zakur
Here's Aquinas' view, from Summa Theologica: Whether the souls of brute animals are subsistent? (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/107503.htm) and Whether the plants and animals will remain in this renewal? (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/509105.htm)And for some more Catholic opinion, see the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on Cruelty to Animals (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04542a.htm).

This last item simply touches on human cruelty to animals--an important issue, quite obviously, but not the question at hand. Or have I missed some subtle bit of something in the words quoted?

The first two pieces do answer my question though, at least as far as Catholicism is concerned. I'm not a believer of any sort, but I do have to admit, I find the thoughts presented to be more than a little bit depressing.

[fhios]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi
The bantering of various historical theologians aside; I believe the original question included the qualifier "according to the bible".

The question cannot be answered, because the bible simply doesn't say what happens to animals when they die, whether they have a soul, etc. It's all assumption.

Y'know, in a way, that view may be the greatest comfort possible. It does shelve the question, but in doing so, it at least spares one from the idea that insane torment, or utter neglect, or absolute nonexistence, is their inevitable fate.

By the way: hello to a fellow Ohioan. I live in Chicago these days, but I'm originally from the Heights.

[fhios]

Originally posted by Yahweh
I cant wait to meet good ol' Adolf in Heaven...

That is an adorable cat!

[fhios]

Originally posted by shemp
Every animal you ever ate comes back and feeds upon you eternally.

I don't eat them!

[fhios]

Originally posted by Yahweh
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/pets.shtml

According to that article, it appears that animals dont go to Heaven, they also dont appear to be going to Hell either.

From the article:

I dont know what to make of that except possibly it refers to the fact that humans will eventually go extinct (or go to Heaven if you want to put "god" into the equation), the rest of the animals will reclaim ownership of the earth. So it all works out.

The article doesn't seem to have appeared above, but my wife, a sincere believer with whom I've been having discussions on this same topic, may have made that same point somewhat more clearly when she assured me that, given the existance of God (again, an assumption I do not make) he (He?) would love my children, pets and friends (who include at least one pagan and a Muslim) more than I do, and would not therefore ultimately express this love, even if it were in a way outside of my comprehension, or any possible expectation. In a way, this does leave Him free to sentence them to hell, but it also does at least infer a happy ending for them, even if it is one after the end of their lives.
Note: I really do like the Muslim view on this question. According to my friend, all animals are obedient to the will of Allah, and therefore always get to the Pearly Gates, or at least their equivelent of same. Still, liking and idea for emotional reasons can never be a reason for accepting it intellectually.

[Cinorjer]

Putting aside my own personal beliefs, the answer to the original question is that the Bible doesn't even consider the issue of what happens to humans after they're dead to be important. The writers of the books certainly couldn't have cared less about what happens to animals. Their whole focus was on getting live people to obey their religious laws. Punishment, for the writers of the OT, was not something that happened after death but visited on the living and their descendents. Rewards were also handed out to the living for good behavior. The whole idea of heaven and hell as a final judgement was pretty much grafted on later.

Other religions did believe animals had spirits like humans that could continue on to "the other side". Of course, that meant a man's favorite hunting dogs and horses were sacrificed and put into the grave with him, so they could continue being his servants in the afterlife. Many times, his wife (wives) were also sent on the trip with him. Shoot, human rights weren't even invented yet, so animal rights was a nonissue.

Jerry