It seems we often ignore the other creatures when we talk about heaven and hell. We know that some Animals were saved from Noah's flood. Then will the animals die and be forgotten or will they go to heaven or hell depending on how they spent their live. We know that most Animals marry more than a wife and it seems right in the animal world. Therefore, it becomes difficult for us to determine how the animals will be judged on the last day, if they will ever stand judgement.
Do you wish for such a thing? Would they even be animals in heaven or like us, without form? That is to say, if heaven exists outside of the individual mind.
Though this is all obviously speculation on my part, my view is that animals are living beings meaning they do pass on spiritually, but do not have free will so I don't believe they're routed one way or the other based on actions.
God does seem to hold them accountable in some aspects, like in Genesis 9 when He's establishing his covenant with Noah ....
Gen 9:4-6 - “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being.
“Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind."
Eh...I was just teasing about spiders and snakes goin' to hell.
Are you guys serious about thinking animals have accountability for their actions so that they go to either heaven or hell?? Actually, thanks for the verses in Genesis, it has led me to consider the meaning of those verses. I'm...pretty sure they don't mean that animals are held to accountability....what version of the Bible did you use?....
Who says 'they' are the lower creatures?
The food chain and our total dominance of the entire inhabitable planet. Though our rank on the food chain definitely drops a few pegs once we leave the land, which is why I don't take cruises.
We're only on top of the food chain if we stay in the city. People in the wild get killed all the time by the animals that live there.
Insects outnumber us about a billion to one, and they live in every habitat.
Humans have been at the top of the food chain since before cities existed. Yes, the world is a dangerous place, but we still dominate it. Until we're in a planet of the apes type scenario, that will remain true.
Heaven, or Hell? - Or Fairyland?, or Narnia? - because there is the same (lack of) evidence that any of these places exist - I can't believe that any of you are discussing this like it's real.
We have NO evidence that .999999999999999 of a per cent of that which is in the universe exists.
If we were able to cause ALL of those things to "Not" exist ; that we have no evidence of ... I'm pretty sure that would cause our non-existence!
So that means that there is even LESS evidence any of them exist. At least I can see, feel and experience what is around me here and now - Not the case with Heaven or Narnia.
That which is flesh, is flesh. That which is spirit , is spirit.
That which is your irrational belief, is your irrational belief.
This could go on and on but the bottom line is whether or not you can show your irrational belief is anything but...
I think this thread is proof this can go on and on. Ditto, A Troubled Man. The bottom line is whether or not you can show your irrational belief is anything but...
Everything in existence today, everything we study scientifically, every physical element this physical world is made of, can be found elsewhere in some form in the universe.
But we can't tie human consciousness to anything physical. We can't attribute it to any matter or particle or element. We can see physical reactions in the brain. We can trace oxygenated blood and see what regions 'light up' based on stimuli. But there's no one area that 'lights up' that ties these various regions together. That drives the will. Genesis says that God said life is in the blood. Blood happens to be the one and only 'connecting' element between the various regions of the brain that work together to perform a task.
To me, your belief is irrational because nothing that even remotely resembles human consciousness can be found elsewhere. And we can't explain how it just came about naturally. There must be a source. A source we just can't detect.
You keep calling people's ability to think into question because you don't agree with their beliefs, though you can't disprove them. And you can't prove yours. You just have faith your belief is right and ours is wrong. So, how does your ability to think make yours more right than ours?
Reality can be shown, unless you believe reality is an irrational belief.
That would be similar to one of the postulates of Special Relativity and I would agree.
The combined matter, particles and elements that make up the brain.
How do you know that? Why does the brain have to work the way you assume it should work?
What you want to believe does not make reality what you want it to be. And, the fact you are sorely misinformed only adds to your confusion.
True, I cannot disprove believers delusions but can only call them out in light of reality.
No, I understand the world around me and hold no beliefs based on faith.
Reality decides those beliefs are delusional, not me.
Define reality. To you reality is nothing more than the physical world. Physical matter. Cause and effect. So you believe our consciousness is simply the culmination of physical elements, like pieces of the universe, that somehow became aware of itself? Yet that's not nearly as far-fetched to you as our belief? That to you is simply common sense and we're misinformed?
"How do you know that? Why does the brain have to work the way you assume it should work?"
Neuroscience. Because if it's strictly physical, as you believe, there are rules that physical elements adhere to.
"What you want to believe does not make reality what you want it to be. And, the fact you are sorely misinformed only adds to your confusion."
Ditto. And you keep throwing this 'misinformed' word around like there's something I've got totally wrong in knowable facts. Please, when you run across one, inform me.
"True, I cannot disprove believers delusions but can only call them out in light of reality."
I cannot disprove your beliefs either. You can compare them to reality as we grasp it now. As we can actually detect it with our limited 5 senses. Only through technology do we know for certain the spectrum of light or sound go beyond what we can see and hear. Before that had to be taken on faith.
To borrow an analogy from Hubber MartyGoldenGate, snails and clams don't have eyes. They have no capability of detecting our presence on the earth, yet we're here. If you were a clam, by your logic, we wouldn't exist.
At this point we're doing pretty good if we grasp even 1% of everything there is to know. You taking what we know now and proclaiming there to be no God, a God that most humans throughout history believe exists, is comparable to a teenager who thinks they know it all despite only having a handful of years to learn.
It's not that you're informed and we're 'misinformed', it's that we're all 'under-informed'. But you have faith that science will ultimately prove you right. It may be decades or centuries from now, long after you and I are gone, but your faith is strong that science will ultimately prove that you're right and we're delusional.
It's called reality, ever heard of it?
Your irrational beliefs have nothing to do with science, let alone Neuroscience.
What beliefs? Please state my beliefs.
Appeal to Belief and Appeal to Popularity.
No, reality shows your beliefs are delusional, not me.
I don't understand why people want to separate the whole soul so much so. I think we all are spiritual beings first, having human experiences. Christianity often enough wants to make you suffer for not being Christlike, what ever the hell that is
That's humans interpreting something they don't understand, though the same source they're using to justify their actions also says not to judge. Not to put yourself in a place of authority and inflict your will on others. All God's commandments said were to recognize He is the authority and all the others specified how to treat each other. When Jesus was asked which commandments were most important, he simply said "Love God, and love each other". All the rest of that is misguided humans doing what they think they're supposed to because that's how they were taught. Many from childhood. They just want to help. Some grow up and really think about that. Others just keep doing what people they love and trust said they should. Humans are fallible.
You can't prove a negative. All proof relies on confirming that something is what is claims to be. Just because I say -"I believe in faries, and there is no way you can disprove that"-, therefore it must be true, is the logic of the lunatic asylum. The onus is upon those who assert something to be true to prove it - not on everyone else to disprove it. Also, this is not my "belief", - as soon as you can provide incontrovertable proof of what you say, I will be believing right along with you. It would be lovely if it were true, but without proof, it's just another case of wishful thinking.
As is a Godless universe. We can't prove the big bang either, but there's evidence to support it. We know our consciousness exists, but we can't prove where it came from. We can't even prove scientifically that it's there. Other than the physical makeup of the brain, there's nothing that differs between the mind of a conscious human and an animal. But there's obviously a difference. So in that case it's not a negative we're trying to prove. Consciousness exists. A consciousness that differs greatly from every other living thing. Prove it's physical. Prove the difference is simply brain mass, or an extended frontal lobe.
But, no evidence to support gods.
Yes, we can.
Yes, it's determined by a number of things, mostly in the makeup of our brains compared to that of other animals.
You've proven nothing here. Obviously I think one thing, you think the other, you think I'm misinformed, I asked you to inform me when that's the case, and all you can offer is, "Yes, we can", and "Yes, it's determined by a number of things, mostly in the makeup of our brains compared to that of other animals."
I'm pretty sure I have a grasp of where neuroscience is currently, but obviously you know something I don't. So, inform me. "Yes, we can" is like me saying, "Yes, God exists".
Sorry, I thought you were trying to say god exists - I certainly believe consciousness exists, because I experience it along with 100% of sentient humankind. I just don't understand the leap of (logic?) which states "therefore it has obviously been given to us by a man in the sky" - How does that work then?
How exactly does it work that a conscious, self-aware mind comes about naturally made up of nothing more than natural elements? How does a piece of the universe become aware of itself if no other awareness of any kind existed before it? How is that leap in logic any less of a leap?
Here we are, a species that came from the same natural elements as the rest of the world, made of the same stuff as every other living thing, yet we live in opposition of nature. We destroy it. We create waste like no other creature. We don't fit so seamlessly in the natural cycle. Why is that? How is that?
Try to pretend for just a moment that it doesn't happen in 6 days or with the wave of a magical hand. Very small changes taking place over hundreds of million of years of evolution.
Again, those who actually take the time to understand evolution...
You provide more reason to doubt and question your religion, or any religion than you do to doubt or question evolution.
I have taken the time to understand evolution. I don't disagree with it. We're talking about human consciousness. It's not physical. There's no evidence to prove it, to show physical materials create it. You can't detect it through science. Science is the study of the natural world. The physical world. Trying to define human consciousness through science is like trying to loosen a bolt with a screwdriver. It's the wrong tool.
No, you haven't, that is blatantly obvious.
And, you continue to show how blatantly obvious that is with each post.
Do you consider psychiatry or psychology science? What scientific field studies art? Can you not admit there is more to life than what the study of a strictly physical world can account for?
Science fascinates me. Always has. But it's limited. There's a whole spectrum of things it cannot detect. Human consciousness is outside it's jurisdiction. Attempting to understand everything in existence using strictly science is limiting. Science has gone a long way towards defining the line between the two. What is natural and what isn't. And to continue to do so science must move forward with a strictly 'naturalist' point of view. That's how it works. You can't allow for super-natural elements in a controlled experiment. You can't allow for infinite possibilities. But they don't have to. Science studies only what's physical.
Surely, if I did consider there is more to life than the physical world, it certainly wouldn't include the ridiculous fantasies and delusions spouted by believers or the myths written in their holy books.
Perhaps, before you introduce yourself to evolution you may want to consider having a look at Science 101, first.
You said "How exactly does it work that a conscious, self-aware mind comes about naturally made up of nothing more than natural elements?" - Why shouldn't it? Pretty much 95% of the theorey of evolution has been proved to be correct (as opposed to 0% of the god theory), and is backed up 100% by DNA theory (as opposed to 0% of the god theory), if scientists like Lei Wang, Peter G. Schultz and their co-workers at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif., can create artificial life (and they have) in the form of a bacterium with all of it's DNA created from scratch in the lab, and such scientists are happy to say that evolution could do exactly the same thing - Then there is a solid nuts-and-bolts CREDIBLE explanation of how things may come about, as opposed to the "god theory" cop-out "a man in the sky made it".
We're talking about consciousness. You're talking about the evolution of our physical form, which I completely agree with. I'm not arguing against evolution. The conscious human mind is different. If you could point me to anyone who's managed to create consciousness in a lab that would be different. Human consciousness is an anomoly compared to the natural world. Our self-awareness, our awareness of the universe around us, is unique. Our destructive nature is unique.
My question is, how did that come about if there was never any form of consciousness anywhere else before it? How did it just come about, born of only natural materials? Unless you can draw a scientifically confirmed line to it, to physical materials that explain it, how is that belief any less 'logical' than belief in God?
But it's exactly the same thing - That's what evolution means - It evolves stuff and qualities that weren't there before. We evolved from single celled creatures - just because they had no arms legs or eyes or consciousness is no reason that we shouldn't. Human conciousness is certainly no "anomaly compared to the natural world" - We are all part of the "natural world" and consciousness is an inevitable consequence of successful evolution. - "a man in the sky did it" can hardly be described as logic.
Is it though? What about the will that drove life to grow legs to reach the earth, to reach that vegetation on the land? The will to adapt physically to enable mobility, to enable breathing the air beyond the sea, to reach that food source. When did that come about naturally? How? Using strictly natural elements?
In Genesis 1 God tells life to do this. To be fruitful and multiply. To fill the earth. So, according to Genesis, God's will did it. These creatures didn't consciously do it. It took many generations, well beyond the individual creature. Yet life as a collective accomplished what Genesis says God told them to do.
So, in that context, evidence of evolution more leans towards a meta-will than a strictly natural occurance.
Again, go learn something about evolution.
That is merely one of many creationist myths, funny how you accept that over other creationist myths, let alone evolution.
"That is merely one of many creationist myths, funny how you accept that over other creationist myths, let alone evolution"
That's because this is the only 'creation myth' that lines up with the geological formation of the earth and all biological life on it. No other lists each major age of earth's history in order as Genesis...
http://headlyvonnoggin.hubpages.com/hub … erspective
And for more detail...
http://promptprocrastination.com/PPBlog … the-other/
"Again, go learn something about evolution."
I have. I'm sure you're referring to the idea of infinite mutations, with only the most successful living on and passing on traits. I get it. I'm not arguing against evolution. It makes perfect sense to me. Not every believer fits into your stereo-typed box.
Oh how I do treasure your emoticons.
So, you agree there's more to life than what science can cover, yet you use strictly the findings of science alone to completely dismiss a belief held by the majority of humanity throughout recorded human history?
Obviously you did not read the hub I provided to back up the statement I made that you found so entertaining. But why would you? As you said, I'm the misinformed one. You're informed. No need to look any further. I'm just delusional. That's all. Nothing to see here.
I never said that, you did.
The last 2000 years is not the majority of recorded human history and it isn't the only belief held by a majority. Appeal to Popularity and Appeal to Belief fallacies.
*pssst - other religious beliefs existed before Christianity - just an fyi*
you said "That's because this is the only 'creation myth' that lines up with the geological formation of the earth and all biological life on it." - Is that the bit where the bible says the world is only six thousand years old, that women were originally made out of mens ribs and snakes could talk ? (that was his first mistake - You should never make talking snakes - they will get you into all kinds of trouble) Nah - if you are going to go with old holy books, and gods and stuff, I'd go with the Egyptian god Ra, who masturbated the universe into existence (sex always sells), after all, it's just as likely, and has just as much evidence going for it as the one in the bible.
Did you actually check out the link I provided, because that's all covered there. You're basing your interpretation of what Genesis says on what the traditional interpretation says. Not what it says.
Note: The original Hebrew doesn't call him a snake. He was the 'deceiver'.
Yes I've read the links, and it looks to me like someone who found it difficult to reconcile what is written in the bible, has decided to produce "interpretations" and guesstimates which will be easier to shoehorn into prevailing theories. interpretations are cheap - everybody has got one. You could just as easily say that when Ra was masturbating the universe into existence, his orgasm was actually the "big bang" etc. Given enough thought, and a bit of cherry picking, it would probably be possible to "interpret" the creation from a copy of "Noddy goes to Toyland"
"Making things fit" is not the same as evidence.
I understand your perspective. But I think you're giving me a bit too much credit. Genesis is more specific than you're implying. And the 'creations' it lists are not some meaningless events cherry-picked to make it work. These are major eras.
I acknowledge the traditional interpretations I was taught just don't work, and that these interpretations are centuries-old and man-made. And while my faith obviously means I lean that direction, my fascination with life and wanting to understand it means looking at everything. I consider every civilization and all of their myths.
The two oldest, the same two that originate in the same region that civilization first formed, are the Sumerian tablets and the books of Moses. Both share many similarities including the 'first' man/woman stories, a flood story with a man building a boat and bringing others and animals, Job stories, and the confusing of a once universal language into many. They also both depict extremely long lifespans that decreased gradually after the flood.
Reading Genesis in the context of Adam being created in a world populated by homo sapiens not only lines up creation-wise, but also could explain the sudden onset of civilization. The Sumerians are credited as the inventors, yet their mythological stories say they were taught by gods. Immortal, human-in-form, walking on the earth, male and female, moody gods. The same gods that most likely serve as the inspiration behind the Greek and Roman gods that came later.
You're quite right in owning up to the fact that the "traditional interpretations just don't work". They need complete re-interpretation to "make them fit" - excatly the same thing happens with the Nostradamus "predictions" - they are shoe-horned into fitting circumstances after the fact. As I said before you can do this with pretty much any vague text. A number of civilisations sharing a myth, doesn't make it any less a myth - It just means that more than one has bought into it. You said "could explain the sudden onset of civilization" This couldn't be the case as the bible tells us the world is six thousand years old, so the "sudden onset" would have had to have been in this timeframe, and advanced civilisations have been found that are at least 9,000 years old
Most of the problems stem from regarding the bible as a factual or historical document - It's not, and was probably never meant to be.
Shoe-horning Nostradamus "predictions" into fitting circumstances after the fact is not the same thing. It's easy to apply many of his 'predictions' to numerous events throughout the history of mankind. You're talking about isolated incidents that are similar to other isolated incidents because history often repeats itself. That's 'cherry-picking'. You've got plenty of similar events all throughout human history to choose from.
I'm talking about a text that directly claims to be the beginning of the earth that starts with an earth with oceans (true), that illustrates land coming later (true), then plantlife not long after (true), that illustrates life coming from the sea (true) including birds (true), and that ends with humans coming after the animals (true). There's nothing to cherry-pick when you're talking about the entirety of earth's history.
Thank you for that link. I was not familiar with that find. That's truly fascinating. But believe me, this sort of find only fleshes things out, it doesn't just blow my theory out of the water like you seem to think it does. If this civilization truly dates back to 7500 BC then that only gives things room to breathe timeline wise. Given it's location I wouldn't doubt it's very much relevant to what I'm talking about. Definitely something to look into further.
But there's a difference between what's being described here and the dawn of civilization in Mesopotamia. The big difference is the use of wide-spread, year-round agriculture. This goes beyond understanding how to plant and grow food. This requires a grasp of seasons and understanding crop rotation. The first Sumerian cities were populated in the tens of thousands. Not to mention the numerous inventions attributed to them including calendars and astronomy and the wheel and the first monarchy and laws and jails and writing.
This is the kind of thing I look for when looking for the dawn of free will. When did early humans transition from finding better and better ways to live within the confines of nature's whim, and when did they begin to create things that never existed before that allowed them to live in spite of nature, demonstrating a will that is their own and independent of the natural world.
Until a few months ago, you believed the speed of light couldn't be broken. Science is often wrong. It relies on Theory not fact. The future will determine whom is correct & whom is not.
The speed of light has not been broken.
Yet, another believer who doesn't understand what a theory is.
The future, indeed. The present show well enough the religious delusions and fantasies believed that have no basis in theory, fact or reality.
It appears you need to catch up on the latest happenings in science. Alot has happened since your science claimed the Sun orbited the Earth.
Science is theory based on fact, not it "relies on theory".
Regardless of what it is that you believe; can you prove beyond any doubt that you believe you can feel these things?
Maybe sometimes but not always.
Depends on if they are good or bad.
Rin Tin Tin, Scout (Tonto's horse), Silver (LR's horse), Lassie, all go to heaven.
Cujo, piranas, great white sharks, anopheles mosquitos, fleas, all go to the hot and heavy.
Animals that get dressed in cute clothes are already in hell so they get reincarnated as second rate actors, like Jim Carey and Nicolas Cage.
God put humans in charge of the animals. God does not hold them responsible to his commandments. We say that animal souls return to Earth, for they do not seek God. We know that a few horses alone with a few others is in heaven from the biblical text of Revelations. These are for God's purpose. Yes, God have pets.
How in the name of any kind of sanity or reason could one believe animals would go to hell-fire? To believe or even consider such a thing is an affront to any kind of Creator, Creation, or God. Why in the name of heaven would an all powerful and unfathomable loving deity create creatures with the built in physiology & chemicals they have and then send them to eternal hell-fire for following their biological demands and functions. And yes, humans can sometimes over come their more negative traits in this area but the same could be said for us as well.
Btw, in 1968 thousands of people saw a Marien(Virgin Mary)Apparition on top of a Christian Coptic church in Egypt for some time; and doves and a donkey were seen along with the supposed Mary. If the apparitions truly came from God then one could say with confidence the lower beasts really do go to heaven although there are other theories for the occurrence of course.( photos & videos of it can be found on the web.)
Are you talking about Republicans or Democrats? Just asking.
Sheep go to heaven. Goats go to hell. Haha jk those are song lyrics. I think there is an animal heaven/utopia where none are abused or neglected and it mixes with human heaven for extra love. I like to think my father is with his best canine friend Spot for eternity. Good question!
Sorry All animal go to hell, unless you rush to your local church and convert them to be saved.
If your animal or pet dose not agree, stop feeding them for a wail, they will come around to your ways soon and think you are Jesus
Wow that's harsh. You and I are two very different people. You have your opinion though and I will respect that.
I commend you on your kindness but that isn't an opinion. lol
He's the class clown. If it's sarcastic, he'll surely cling to it.
That's his safety net.
But it's alright, sometimes he isn't so bad.
Do you mean we do not have the same sense of humor? lol
At least you don't have to circumcise the males anymore.
Animals don't have the luxury of believing in things like religion. They're more bothered by finding food to eat and stopping predators from eating them. They won't go to heaven or hell, they'll just die of old age if they're lucky, or by being killed if not.
I hope you you don't think I'm religion, only specking on behalf of the religious hopeless animals lover who treat their pets the same as their children
Well I am one of those. My pets are my children, as I am not really a kid person. Guess we can agree to disagree. I am not religious but I like to think good people and all animals go to a better place, as so many are treated poorly in this world.
No pun intended, just a kind question because I got a mixed impression...
No religion? But still a better place?
Apologies, I don't understand. The whole ideal came from religion didn't it? Life after death.. a better place etc. and so forth?
Rewarded for poor treatment would go hand in hand with punishment for hateful and mean pain causing actions wouldn't it??
Anyway, not attempting another subject, just confused on your perspective is all.
My beliefs are odd I know. and even hard to explain. I was born Catholic and believe in God but not religion or the Bible. I don't know what happens after we die but reincarnation or a utopia are nice thoughts
Well lets hope you haven't completely ruled out the Bible, as I don't know many who know the entire book cover to cover and you seem SOOO smart.. serious. And apparently can't learn enough. ( you actually sound like me, an endless sponge, lol )
But hey, we're all different right?
Thx, was just curious.
Np I don't mind the questions and yours are interesting. No it's not that I ruled it out, because you are right I have not read it all. I believe it is a great story based in history (and I love historical fiction). But that is all it is. I don't understand following it like it is the word of God, if that makes sense. To me it is like basing my beliefs solely upon Grapes of Wrath -or- War and Peace.
Lol, I know what you mean in part. Sometimes I read the OT and say God? That sounds kinda mean, I know I'm probably missing a detail, but help..? lol
Lots of times things correlate correctly, and I think for the record to have been preserved so well says a lot in general anyway.. I can say things make more sense sometimes with more text from the entirety, especially since the books aren't exactly chronological anyhow, and then the prophesy thing and translation ordeal..
Can't WAIT to learn Hebrew, Greek, and Araimic.
Just remember, you don't have to believe it to read it.
People say "it's soo barbaric!"..
I listened to someone say that and walked into their house with a bookshelf of nothing but murder stories.. lol
I don't judge though, you just have to take it for what it is first. A record.. Then once the connections start to show up, you can decide and tell everyone, nope, read it all.. still nothing.
Though I don't hear it much, lol, which if I'm honest makes me happy.
I have lots of faith, but I could ALWAYS use more, but I'm a slow reader. Might take me awhile, plus i end up studying to understand the cultural ways of the times and why this or that was said three paragraphs in anyway.
It is the world's best selling story after all.
I agree it is based in history and is a record of the times. And it is a good story no doubt. I also don't see any of it as barbaric as society today. As you said, many people today love a good murder mystery or a great gore horror movie (me included). I am glad you have an open mind. I often get people thinking I am an atheist or something without even hearing me out. I just like to have my faith and spirituality (which are two different things) where I see fit for myself. We all have beliefs, mine are just mostly created as I go and not very conventional. Nice speaking with you
Haha so funny how far off topic many of the comments to this question have gone - many tangents. The discussions created here though are priceless, so props and kudos to davidkaluge for delving into an intriguing subject matter!
I hear often enough that :All Dogs go to Heaven:, maybe because they are the only one who can manage to love unconditional naturally and pure (God spelling it backwards is doG) Maybe most people go to hell because rarely we can love unconditional and run a stray to other gods
I wonder every 7 years for a dog equals 1 human year, would 7 difference dogs show up to met with their same master in Heaven. Would each dog get jealousy of the other like how God get jealous of other Gods
They will go to the same place that we will all go, back to the earth.
That translation comes from the NIV. That kind of throws me too, assuming animals don't have free will, but the way that reads to me basically means that anytime a human's blood is spilled, someone or something will be held accountable.
Animals are as free to do whatever they want and are only restricted by the environment and external influences around them, just like we are.
Most of their behavior is instinctual. That's why countless individual animals of a given species behave just like all the other individuals in that species. There is an obvious delicate balance in the animal kingdom that free will would reek absolute havoc on. Like if individual cells in your body could decide on their own free will whether or not to adhere to what the body's DNA dictates. If that were the case then each cell could potentially become cancerous, endangering the organism as a whole. If animals truly had free will the world would be a much different place.
Do you anything to back that up because it all sounds like pure baloney?
Which part sounds like baloney? The delicate balance of the natural world or free will's potential affect on it?
The will that drives each individual creature is not their own. They simply follow by instinct. They are conscious just as we are, they have quirks and personalities, but they do exactly as they were told by God to do during creation. They're fruitful and they multiply.
A multitude of individual beings of varying species, all following God's will to be fruitful and multiply, living in close proximity, inevitably they intersect. They adapt and change to continue to exist and do as they were told. They develop defenses to protect themselves, physical traits that aid in hunting, all to do what God said. Life feeds on life.
But they weren't given an individual will to be whatever they chose to be. They still live within the balance of nature. We're the ones that don't. We're the ones that leave waste and destroy to live. We're the ones that live in opposition to, and outside the will of, nature. God's will is born of his infinite wisdom in knowing exactly what they need. Our will is young and ignorant and while we have a lot of great ideas, we still ultimately prove to be very new to the game.
All of it.
Faith based 'goddunit' baloney.
"Faith based 'goddunit' baloney."
Faith based 'nothing-dunit' baloney. What's the difference? The difference is you've brought nothing new to the table and I've backed up my theories with both ancient documentation that dates back to the dawn of civilization and have shown how current scientific understanding does not conflict. What do you have to offer to convince me you're baloney is more rational or sound than mine?
You trying to say they are robots?
I don't know why I even consider some things....
In that case YOU are a robot..
I can do the robot dance.. but i aint one, and neither is my dog or the birds.
You need to study more on systems before saying they can't operate within laws without differences from one another.. thats absurd.. lol
Okay. Yeah the KJV reads different from the NIV.
KJV says (verse 5):
"And surely your blood of your lives will I require, at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man."
and verse 6 goes on to explain--
"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."
So...it's showing man's superiority over the animals. We can use them for food, and we're allowed to kill them if they kill a person, just as we're allowed to kill murderers via capital punishment; and especially it is humans who are made in the image of God, not animals. It isn't saying that animals have free will nor will go to heaven or hell.
Don't drag them into strictly human concepts. There are animals in "heaven" as well as "hell" but they are not condemned or rewarded. It is natural for them to be there.
I think we have to ask, what goes to heaven or hell after death? That is since the physical body will decay. Secondly, some people believe in a new earth where man and animals will live together. Thirdly, some people claim that heaven is beauitful and have flowers, though we wonder how they know it. However, those that say it claim its by vision or whatever. Then if flowers are in heaven, it means animals can stand a chance. But did God create the animals to just live and die or kill us or cause disease.
God told Adam to have dominion over the animals. God wouldn't tell us to use animals for meat, etc., if they were slated to choose between heaven and hell.
They are a natural part of the content heaven, hell, here...anywhere.
"and God breathed life into his creation, and his creation became a living soul." If it lives, it has soul
I believe that's true. If you look at the original Hebrew in Genesis 2:19, when God brings the animals to Adam to name them, the part that says "And whatever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof", in the original Hebrew 'living creature' is actually translated from 'nphsh chie' (or "living soul").
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInte … f/gen2.pdf
But I don't think animals go to hell. Though my personal interpretation of hell is not how most see it anyway. I don't see it as a place of eternal pain and suffering. As far as I've seen, the only thing described as eternal in reference to hell was the fire itself. I think it more means that beings with free will who refuse to acknowledge God as the authority are simply removed from existence. Just as a cell that doesn't conform to the specified behavior mandated by DNA has to be removed so that it's cancerous tendencies don't spread. Without free will, animals would not be able to 'choose' to not acknowledge God as the ultimate authority.
I see it as a natural cycle, even space/time is a part of nature. This all one thing, I'm just seeing the different interpretations of nature. That is what I have, I wear my own mirrored glasses.
The term Soul does not imply eternal life. The soul is the body one inhabits. Soul & spirit are NOT the same.
I believe, and can see no alternative within my heart for I've actually prayed on understanding this before, that God who loves us as much as He doesn't wouldn't make them exist just to "disappear" just as He didn't make us to disappear.. It's just a simple parallel as God's nature is unchanging and consistent, meaning He loves the animals too.
Not only that, but concerning animals and Hell.. Pah-leeezzeeee.. lol
Jesus said two sparrows are sold for a penny and not one goes unnoticed before the Father...
Paraphrased of course.
That I think should be a case solver.
Animals don't have free will????
They are free as it gets.
They run where they please.. eat what they please.. freely live where they please away from humanity (where we haven't destroyed or placed a city)
They freely play when the please..
Do EXACTLY whatever they want, WHENEVER they want, WHEREEVER they want... lol
They certainly without doubt have free will, and I won't argue with anyone if they reply opposite to this post..
But I will get a good laugh..
bees don't bother god ,nor do lions pray, lower creatures are the only silence god gets. all are welcome i bet
It's all well and good to want animals in heaven, but let's be honest. They talk about heaven being a big city. If you let the animals in, who's going to clean up the poop?
And if you let the animals in....where does it stop? Does that mean insects will be there too? Would it really be heaven if you had to share it with mosquitos?
And fish. Where would you put something like a whale shark?
You people aren't thinking this one through.
I was pondering the question and I wasn't sure if I should have answered in a humorous way or go in the lets pretend route. So I took the "Prudence" (Bones) route. No one knows for sure if there is a Heaven or a Hell. But if I were able to say for a 100% certainty that there were anything of the sort. There is no Hell and Heaven is not anything our brains could imagine. We are all made up of the same things. That is a fact. With that typed, everything on Earth turns into some other form of energy and "lives" in a new way that we can not fathom until we are dead.
I believe in Heaven, and I believe I'll go there. I also believe that God will have whatever we need in Heaven to make us happy. For me, that would include a couple of horses, a cat or two, and lots of dogs - all creatures I loved during my earthly life.
Everyone dies for their sin. The bible states " The soul that sinnith shall surely die. "
Right, okay, I can see how you're looking at it I think. Unless I'm missing something, that only really means the soul is the body if you believe in eternal damnation, which I do not. I believe those who do not acknowledge God as the ultimate authority will simply be removed from existence. Here's part of why I think that ...
Ecclesiastes 9:5 - For the living know that they shall die; but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
You know man can be funny. We claim that God gave us dominion over the other creatures so that is why we use them as food. However, we forget that some of these creatures use us for food and in their world, they may claim God gave them the right to feast on us and they are right because they were made that why. Just as they were created with freewill, as we claim. But we need to go to the animal world to understand if they have freewill. I think some animals do have the choice to their action.
Neither, they just decompose and recycle into the earth - as we all do.
Well, I do not think even people go to heaven. If one truly reads the Bible, it says we all have the same fate, humans and animals, all return to dust. When we are dead we are dead, animals and humans. When Jesus resurrected his friend, Lazarus, he didn't say: "He is in heaven." Lazarus did not tell people about heaven. Jesus said Lazarus was 'asleep in the grave." Period! People do not become angels because the Bible explicitly tells us angels are not and never were, human, except those who tried human forms before the flood. But they are not able to take on human forms anymore, but then, those who did were rebellious angels or demons, not obedient ones. Good question though.
Heaven and hell are here and now. It all depends on personal perspective. It doesn't even count as opinion...this is more individual truth. That is why I said that animals exist in all three states. (There's that damn three again.) We exist in all three states at the same time. There is more to all the holy books than we have previously understood. Whatever is going on has been going on longer than we have been here. Simple as that.
When I was in school a teacher once said that if it wasn't for all those spiders, birds, and small furry animals eating insects, we'd be knee deep wading through them. Now if all those flies go to heaven, how deep an infestation would there be after several million years? so in answer to the question, I think not.
Same number here as there. We stand upon the earth, but we walk through heaven. Hell wasn't created , it is self created. Born in it? Geuss you been bad. Man is not the same as the animals...we have crimes to pay for. Don't worry, all dogs go to the heaven beyond, but all soul is mixed in the same bowl...and yet still separate.
Animals in hell? Are you serious?
Hell is not a 'place', hell is a murderous, angry, vengeful, scheming, nasty obsessive mind and heart. We've all 'been there' to varying degrees for varying periods of time. Hell can be a really bad mood. We know what hell could be like. But hell is definitely not a 'place' out there-- full of the particular wild animals we personally don't like. Geebus. Hell is a 'state' of being that transcends death.
Animals (and babies) are the only truly, hell-devoid creatures on the planet. We create our own hells and we cast ourselves into hell through our thoughts, actions and feelings.
Animals are the only thing we've got to show us innocence and truth in action. Animals just do what they do, there is nothing inherent in them that predisposes them to entertaining evil or hellish thoughts. Animals are neither 'good' or 'bad' they just are.
Hell is anywhere you want it to be, anytime you choose. Or not. But there are definitely no animals who inhabit the hells like we do.
I'm sorry, but I can't believe anyone could seriously believe animals would or should 'go to' hell, that's absurd.
BobbiRant, were in the bible was it written that animal and man have same fate?
So, do animals go to heaven?
What about microbes, viruses and worms?
interesting topic, animals eat living things to survive. While for humans to eat a living thing is an option. They have the brain and knowledge to choose.
Some bugs eat living meat, (fleas and the like), so do insects also fall into the animal survival-to-eat waiver program?
I always wondered with the recent NASA discoveries on possible life in another universe can that be a so-called heaven?
I would figure that considering human behavoir, quadripeds have a way better chance of going to heaven than you or I do.
Well, we know that not all animals eat flesh so we can't use that to judge them. They also have option as to what to eat and what not. I want to know where the bible said we have same fate as animals.
by Anan Celeste15 months ago
Why are there spirits roaming the earth? Does this means that there is no heaven or hell?
by platinumOwl417 months ago
Where is Heaven or Hell actually located in a turning Universe?When Heaven or hell is spoken of there is the indication of direction, up or down. This becomes complicated in a turning and expanding Universe.
by cakedew6 years ago
Asking Buddhism, Islam, Christian and Hinduism... What will Happen....What will happen to pretty nice guy that live his life with good moral compass.He not killing anyone...He not cheating anyone...He always help people...
by Emile R6 years ago
Everyone keeps talking about who gets to go which way; and I realized no one has ever said where they think either is. I'd be interested in the thoughts of those who think we go straight to heaven or hell when we die....
by John Paolo B.Magdaluyo4 years ago
Do you believe in heaven and hell?I'm really fascinated in works in proving the existence of the two dimension? I don't know what particular word to describe them. But looking forward for your opinions.
by Harish Mamgain4 years ago
Are eternal Heaven and eternal Hell not the human concepts only ?With utmost respect to all religions and their adherents, I compel to think that if these two concepts are excluded from the religious texts, the...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.