Why does christianity say animals have no souls? Do animals not go to heaven?
- Thread starter Xanikk999
- Start date
Mirc
Not mIRC!!!
It's been very much discussed if animals have souls.
In conclusion if your a christian or other you can take them or leave them unless your a Catholic in which case John Paul II has told you all that Animals have souls and he's the motuhpiece of God so there. In fact by that logic of course then all animals have souls and anyone who says otherwise is defying God himself. I wonder if there is a Papal bull to the effect that animals have souls?
classical_hero
In whom I trust
The differences between humans and chimops are so great that what you are describing is an impossiblity.Sahkuhnder said:
BTW, this is a pointless thread.
Erik Mesoy
Core Tester / Intern
@OP - I suppose there will be animals in heaven, but animals don't go to heaven.
@sahkuhnder, above - Once we start uplift programs, I suppose we'll either find a discrete line of consciousness to draw for what creatures have souls, or (facetiously) God will send his son to be born as a half-breed Messiah. It'll match very well with the prophecies -
@sahkuhnder, above - Once we start uplift programs, I suppose we'll either find a discrete line of consciousness to draw for what creatures have souls, or (facetiously) God will send his son to be born as a half-breed Messiah. It'll match very well with the prophecies -
- don't you agree?Isaiah 53 said:
Well if you'd read the thread you'd know that the Catholic church has decreed that animals have souls according to ancient scripture and thus can go to heaven. I'm not going to argue with the Pope on this one, you can though. I suspect you know more about religion than him 
when you find him in heaven can you send me a sign to let me know either way? Oh and is Fred my old dog there?
when you find him in heaven can you send me a sign to let me know either way? Oh and is Fred my old dog there?
If we do manage to breed intelligent chimps it won't matter whether we think they have souls or not. We don't have to draw the line; it can be safely assumed that God will figure out what kind of soul they have.
7ronin
海軍少佐
Well if beetles are getting in, maybe cockroaches are as well. Can heaven be heaven if cockroaches are allowed?
Maybe cockroaches are automatically sent to hell.
Maybe cockroaches are automatically sent to hell.
7ronin said:
There's a cockroach heaven, underneath a fridge the size of the sun. It's nowhere near people heaven, so don't worry.
Meleager
Stoned as a Statue
Erik Mesoy said:It'll match very well with the prophecies - ... - don't you agree?
Very Good.I don't know if animals have souls. I guess they have free will, which requires some escape from causality (we'll just treat "random" as a cause). In any case, they aren’t made in God's image.
I don't believe animals have souls...as for the pope's statement-religious values seem to adjust with the times often; religion was very homophobic at first even hostile towards homosexuals and other religions-that is now politically incorrect, meaning few if any people would support a religion that claimed groups of people should be killed on basis of moral duty.
The pope was just making the latest in a long line of ass-kissing statements to get animal supporters to favor his religion. Animals(according to the bible) were created to give man companionship, not as equals as Adam soon became lonely with a world full of animals. They were not self-aware beyond survival purposes(after the 1st sin), the very definition of a soul. Humans could not eat other humans because they had "souls", they could eat animals however due to their lack of a soul.
There may be new animals made in whatever afterlife there happens to be, but I doubt they would be animals from this life
.
The pope was just making the latest in a long line of ass-kissing statements to get animal supporters to favor his religion.
Animals(according to the bible) were created to give man companionship, not as equals as Adam soon became lonely with a world full of animals. They were not self-aware beyond survival purposes(after the 1st sin), the very definition of a soul. Humans could not eat other humans because they had "souls", they could eat animals however due to their lack of a soul.There may be new animals made in whatever afterlife there happens to be, but I doubt they would be animals from this life
.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
Because Christians think that God favors humans above all other creatures. They are obviously wrong.
Annex
Tyranny and Mutation
Thats why nothing happens when you eat an animal's heart, but when you eat the heart of a human you gain their courage.
Moderator Action: Not if the discussion fails to support them.
If the Christian god is omnipresent then he is in everything living and non living. I would think his presence there would be better than a soul.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Actually the bible is quite clear than animals do have souls.
The Hebrew word for a living soul is"Nepesh," which is used of humans and animals. The term is closely related to the concept of "breath of life" though, and Man is the only animal described as having God personally breathe this into it rather than just being created with breath. It can certainly be argued that the soul of a man is of a different nature than that of a beast, but not that animals lack souls.
(The Latin word "Anima" is essentially synonymous with Nepesh. The word animal literally means "thing that has an anima." Etymologically speaking it makes no sense to claim animals have no souls. By definition anything with a soul is an animal and anything that is an animal has a soul.)
The Latin word "animus" is also translated soul, although it is distinct from its feminine form "anima." Aminus is sometimes rendered as mind and anima sometimes as heart or spirit, although both derives from the idea of the breath of life. Anima is that most essential to who one is, one's very nature and deepest emotions, whereas animus has more to do with one's mood, personality, or decision making process. The term animus seems to be more common when dealing with humans than other animals but is not exclusively used this way. In fact when I was taking my first Latin course the first time the term came up was in the description of an angry wild boar.
The word spirit is from "spiritus" which comes from a different but synonymous root, still meaning breath. I'm not really sure if this term is used for other animals or not.)
In the beginning God gave Man dominion over the animals, but not the right to kill and eat meat. The term dominion refers to the type of authority a master has over a slave. This means we were given the right to force animals to perform labor for us and we can profit from their wool, features, milk, eggs, etc, but that we are also in a position of stewardship over them and may only kill them in self defense or punishment for injuries they caused us. The right to kill and eat animals was given to Noah after the Flood. At the same time he was commanded never to eat an animal's blood, as that would be an act of disrespect towards a fellow soul.
The bible actually states the fate of the soul of Man or beast upon death is the same. They both go into the ground, or sheol where there is no knowledge, understanding, or consciousness. The concept of the soul leaving for heaven or hell immediately upon death is a fairly recent addition to Judeochristian tradition, although similar pagan ideas are much older.
Personally I lean towards the view that the soul is mortal and there is not a particularly significant difference between the soul of humans and other animals. However, in the last days human souls will be resurrected in new bodies to face judgment, which we have no reason to believe will happen for other animals. Those who follow Christ will be given immortal, immaculate new forms while the rest will die again, ceasing to exist rather than facing eternal torment. I see no reason to believe that lesser animals can be true Christians, so there probably won't be any immortal dogs or cats.
The Hebrew word for a living soul is"Nepesh," which is used of humans and animals. The term is closely related to the concept of "breath of life" though, and Man is the only animal described as having God personally breathe this into it rather than just being created with breath. It can certainly be argued that the soul of a man is of a different nature than that of a beast, but not that animals lack souls.
(The Latin word "Anima" is essentially synonymous with Nepesh. The word animal literally means "thing that has an anima." Etymologically speaking it makes no sense to claim animals have no souls. By definition anything with a soul is an animal and anything that is an animal has a soul.)
The Latin word "animus" is also translated soul, although it is distinct from its feminine form "anima." Aminus is sometimes rendered as mind and anima sometimes as heart or spirit, although both derives from the idea of the breath of life. Anima is that most essential to who one is, one's very nature and deepest emotions, whereas animus has more to do with one's mood, personality, or decision making process. The term animus seems to be more common when dealing with humans than other animals but is not exclusively used this way. In fact when I was taking my first Latin course the first time the term came up was in the description of an angry wild boar.
The word spirit is from "spiritus" which comes from a different but synonymous root, still meaning breath. I'm not really sure if this term is used for other animals or not.)
In the beginning God gave Man dominion over the animals, but not the right to kill and eat meat. The term dominion refers to the type of authority a master has over a slave. This means we were given the right to force animals to perform labor for us and we can profit from their wool, features, milk, eggs, etc, but that we are also in a position of stewardship over them and may only kill them in self defense or punishment for injuries they caused us. The right to kill and eat animals was given to Noah after the Flood. At the same time he was commanded never to eat an animal's blood, as that would be an act of disrespect towards a fellow soul.
The bible actually states the fate of the soul of Man or beast upon death is the same. They both go into the ground, or sheol where there is no knowledge, understanding, or consciousness. The concept of the soul leaving for heaven or hell immediately upon death is a fairly recent addition to Judeochristian tradition, although similar pagan ideas are much older.
Personally I lean towards the view that the soul is mortal and there is not a particularly significant difference between the soul of humans and other animals. However, in the last days human souls will be resurrected in new bodies to face judgment, which we have no reason to believe will happen for other animals. Those who follow Christ will be given immortal, immaculate new forms while the rest will die again, ceasing to exist rather than facing eternal torment. I see no reason to believe that lesser animals can be true Christians, so there probably won't be any immortal dogs or cats.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
Christianity says that animals do not have souls because it is in denial of the fact that one day, we furries will kidnap all non-furs and indoctrinate them by forcing them into fursuits that are glued to their flesh and thus cannot be taken off. Don't worry, however: the mouths are movable and all the necessary holes have been made to allow for healthy function. 
Apart from being warmer and cuddlier - and overall more beautiful - life will be perfectly normal.
Seriously, I don't know. I suppose it's just the human ego manifesting in religious texts; just as our desire for an afterlife manifests in religion, it only makes sense our desire to be number one would as well.
Perhaps animals have souls, perhaps they do not. It depends on what the "soul" is. Is it, first and foremost, sentience and independence of mind? In some cases, many animals could indeed have souls; they may be of lower intelligence, but that means nothing, as the mentally-handicapped also would have souls despite their lower functioning.
Apart from being warmer and cuddlier - and overall more beautiful - life will be perfectly normal.Seriously, I don't know. I suppose it's just the human ego manifesting in religious texts; just as our desire for an afterlife manifests in religion, it only makes sense our desire to be number one would as well.
Perhaps animals have souls, perhaps they do not. It depends on what the "soul" is. Is it, first and foremost, sentience and independence of mind? In some cases, many animals could indeed have souls; they may be of lower intelligence, but that means nothing, as the mentally-handicapped also would have souls despite their lower functioning.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Don't forget the trillions of trillions of bugs, amoeba, viruses, and various other tiny & microscopic lifeforms.
Heaven must be teeming with them! They gotta be everywhere..
edit: xpost!
Well, that is undoubtedly true, but heaven will be quite large enough.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
That's kinda unfair thought that *all* the animals go to heaven, but most humans end up going to hell
Similar threads
- Poll
