God is intensely interested in the salvation of animals!

A God who is intensely interested even in the salvation of animals (along with the wicked Ninevites) must be interested in anyone.

Bruckner, J. (2004). The NIV Application Commentary: Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (103). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Greg

Just the cattle, it seems.

Ben Vargh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114431#Comment_114431

Nevertheless, I am finding the NIVAC series immensely useful!

Robert Pavich

A God who is intensely interested even in the salvation of animals (along with the wicked Ninevites) must be interested in anyone.

Bruckner, J. (2004). The NIV Application Commentary: Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (103). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Please fill me in...this commentary didn't actually say that did it?

Paul Golder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114511#Comment_114511

A God who is intensely interested even in the salvation of animals (along with the wicked Ninevites) must be interested in anyone.

Bruckner, J. (2004). The NIV Application Commentary: Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (103). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Please fill me in...this commentary didn't actually say that did it?

Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains,
your judgments are like the great deep;
you save humans and animals alike, O LORD.
The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989), Ps 36:6.

Chuck P.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114521#Comment_114521

I don't see "salvation" here....I see "protection"....

Paul Golder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114527#Comment_114527

I don't see "salvation" here....I see "protection"....

Baker makes some good points:

3467. יָשַׁע yāšaʿ: A verb meaning to save, to help, to deliver, to defend. The underlying idea of this verb is bringing to a place of safety or broad pasture as opposed to a narrow strait, symbolic of distress and danger. The word conveys the notion of deliverance from tribulation (Judg. 10:13, 14); deliverance from certain death (Ps. 22:21[22]); rescue from one’s enemies (Deut. 28:31; Judg. 6:14); victory in time of war (1 Sam. 14:6); the protective duty of a shepherd (Ezek. 34:22; cf. Judg. 10:1); avenging wrongs (1 Sam. 25:33); compassionate aid in a time of need (2 Kgs. 6:26, 27; Ps. 12:1[2]); the salvation that only comes from God (Isa. 33:22; Zeph. 3:17).
Warren Baker, The Complete Word Study Dictionary : Old Testament (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2003), 484.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114532#Comment_114532

Yes. Salvation doesn't always mean deliverance from the consequences of sin. nor should it. It has the meaning required by the context.

Jacob Hantla

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114521#Comment_114521

[:P]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114521#Comment_114521

If I recall correctly it was Spanish Jesuits who discussed a length the question of animals in heaven. A Dominican priest informed me that parrots would make it to heaven but he wasn't sure about cats or dogs. (a joke folks, a joke by a parrot-owning priest).

Paul Golder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114534#Comment_114534

Yes. Salvation doesn't always mean deliverance from the consequences of sin. nor should it. It has the meaning required by the context.

Agreed.

The problem as I see it though, is while I can not speak to the thoughts of Bruckner, one would think that when writing for an evangelical commentary, you would be exacting in the use of the word Salvation...

Paul Golder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114546#Comment_114546

If I recall correctly it was Spanish Jesuits who discussed a length the question of animals in heaven. A Dominican priest informed me that parrots would make it to heaven but he wasn't sure about cats or dogs. (a joke folks, a joke by a parrot-owning priest).

There is also the consideration of which country and state the animal is from, [;)]

Ronald Quick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114554#Comment_114554

I cannot speak for all animals, but if my 2 dogs don't make it to heaven I know a lot of people who won't either.

Dewayne Davis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114584#Comment_114584

I cannot speak for all animals, but if my 2 dogs don't make it to heaven I know a lot of people who won't either.

Please don't be worried. It is a well known fact that all dogs go to heaven.

Floyd Johnson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114590#Comment_114590

I don't know if church attendance makes a difference or not - but for the last three years, our dog attended church more often than I did. We inherited him from a senior citizen last September. She would take Bo Dandy to church at her senior living center every week - whether I was preaching or whether we had a pulpit supply serving for the day. Most likely I was traveling (either by train to the west coast of the USA or by car to a Christian conference). Regardless, attendance did not happen when on the road.

Ruth is now in heaven - but Bo Dandy remains with us. Though I still preach at the same service, dogs that do not live in at the senior center are not allowed inside. I have promised to bring him back next summer when the weather is warm enough for an outdoor service.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114511#Comment_114511

A God who is intensely interested even in the salvation of animals (along with the wicked Ninevites) must be interested in anyone.

Bruckner, J. (2004). The NIV Application Commentary: Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (103). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Please fill me in...this commentary didn't actually say that did it?

Yes, it says that, but you've got to see it in context...

Next...the biblical context...

Later...

Finally...that actual quote makes some sense (though admittedly, it's still a bit odd):

And if I get to heaven and find that my dear Cricket isn't there, I'll be very disappointed that God tricked me into thinking heaven is a wonderful place.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114627#Comment_114627

I had a wonderful dog (actually very similar to Cricket in appearance) called Tim. He was faithful and loyal (most of the time), but knew right from wrong. In other words he could tell the difference between dog biscuits in his bowl, and a chocolate cake cooling on a shelf in the kitchen - though he didn't always make the right choices!

So he was faithful and loyal - but he was utterly godless. So far as I was able to
tell he never thought of God, never prayed to God, never worshipped God, never thanked God. If heaven was fully of doggy biscuits (or chocolate cake!) he might like it there. But a heaven that's all about God is not for him.

Fred Chapman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114641#Comment_114641

If there are dogs in heaven I hope they stay off the golf course and don't need to go outside when the football game is on.[;)]

Alan Macgregor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114649#Comment_114649

You would be surprised just how often, as a parish minister, I am asked about animals, usually belovèd pets, being in heaven. I have to say that I am agnostic on this, as the only scripture I know that touches on this is Ecclesiastes 3:21. Who knows? Only the Lord knows but my speculation, which is only that, is that – no they don't. And I say that as a person who has been accompanied through my adult life by dogs – all Golden Retrievers or Golden Labradors, Gregor, Corie Buidhe, Cuchlan Ban and currently Samwise. I have loved them all dearly (I still love Samwise) and wept unashamedly when they died, but as I see it, in heaven I shall have only one focus and that will be my Lord Jesus. I may be aware of those, whom I have loved, around me in that crowd, but I think the most I shall do is nudge them and whisper, "Isn't He beautiful, my Saviour and my God," before I throw my crown at His feet, 'lost in wonder, love and praise.'

Robert Pavich

A God who is intensely interested even in the salvation of animals (along with the wicked Ninevites) must be interested in anyone.

Bruckner, J. (2004). The NIV Application Commentary: Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (103). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Thanks for all of the input, and thanks Rosie for providing some context...

Even with the context of the passage and the commentator's context, this comment does seem like it is just stretching it a bit...clearly, the commentator's intention is that salvation is in mind, and that this is some kind of comment on who God intends to save...

PS: If Pancho doesn't make it I'm going to cry.

DominicM

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114649#Comment_114649

AARGH: Call it a "Pet Hate" if you wish.. I hate posts like this..

Scripture is very clear about God caring for the welfare of animals, and animals being in heaven..

All this meaningless debate of the Soteriology of Animals, and whether animals have souls, while we have a world of Sinners who do have souls, sliding down that slippery slope to Hell.. forgive me, but how many people that we know or come into contact with.. will die in there sins without hearing the Gospel while the "church" at large continues to have this meaningless debate.

Our enemy is cunning directing us into paths of meaningless discussion, anything to get our attention off what we should be doing, which is throwing the lifelines, and sowing the seed..

Sorry If I sound like a fundamentalist, but IMO there are more important issues than this today in our sphere of influence!... ..and when we see Jesus face to face we probably will be crying at how much time we wasted on trivial meaningless pursuits..

So lets choose to spend our time on the cutting edge where it counts...

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114641#Comment_114641

I recommend a Basic Search for souls NEAR animals. The divine church of prophetic animals & birds is interesting (Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol IV, 4.88) but the bible at 1 Sam 15:3, 2 Chron 35:7 and Gen 1:26 is more relevant!

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114657#Comment_114657

and when we see Jesus face to face we probably will be crying at how much time we wasted on trivial meaningless pursuits..

Including getting on forums and posting rebuke.... [:$]

DominicM

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114663#Comment_114663

Oh yes, all my windows are broken.. [:D]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114641#Comment_114641

I had a wonderful dog (actually very similar to Cricket in appearance) called Tim. He was faithful and loyal (most of the time), but knew right from wrong. In other words he could tell the difference between dog biscuits in his bowl, and a chocolate cake cooling on a shelf in the kitchen - though he didn't always make the right choices!

So he was faithful and loyal - but he was utterly godless. So far as I was able to tell he never thought of God, never prayed to God, never worshipped God, never thanked God. If heaven was fully of doggy biscuits (or chocolate cake!) he might like it there. But a heaven that's all about God is not for him.

I used to have a fairly similar view of heaven -- i.e., that it is a non-physical disembodied existence of just praising and worshiping God. I've changed my views on that over time, due in no small part to the explanations I've read from a growing number of Bible expositors and theologians I know who see heaven / the coming eschatological Kingdom / the New Jerusalem as an extension and renewal of God's good Creation. Isaiah 65; 66:22, 2 Peter 3:13; and Rev 21 all talk about a new heaven (or heavens) and a new earth. The New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven (Rev 21:2), and "God’s dwelling place is now among the people" (Rev 21:3). It is passages like these, and the Christian belief in the resurrection of the body (based on Scripture, e.g., Matt. 27:52; Rom. 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:35, 42–44; Phil. 3:21), that make people like Gordon Fee and NT Wright teach us to rethink the whole traditional idea of an ethereal heaven where just our souls reside. I believe that in the New Creation, all the good things about this creation that God intended from the beginning (plants, animals, sunlight, etc.) will be present and recognizeable in some way (Jesus' resurrected body did not look like a spirit; even though the disciples walking along the Emmaus road with him didn't recognize him as Jesus at first, they took him to be a stranger from out of town, which they wouldn't have if he'd been some non-physical being without a body). I don't know that individual non-human created beings (specific dogs, etc.) will be the same as the ones they were on earth. Perhaps not. But these aspects of God's creation didn't sin against him and fall, so their need to be recreated is only due to how we have marred them through our sin.

I'm agnostic about it too, and I wasn't serious about saying I'd be disappointed in God if my dog isn't there. He knows best and I fully trust that his new heaven and new earth will be far more amazing than anything I could dream up, and I know I won't miss or think about the things of this earth (or the people or animals I've known who aren't there; Isa 65:17b: "The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind."). But I do still think God delights in our love and care for the species he made as part of his Creation. It is all a part of appreciating and worshiping him, for he gave us these wonderful beasts! So who knows whether that kind of love could continue in the New Creation? But it wouldn't be inconsistent with what I believe about God. In any event, part of being "lost in wonder, love and praise" toward our Lord and God is the awe and joy at what he has created. It all is a reflection of his wondrous qualities.

Alan Macgregor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114665#Comment_114665

But I do still think God delights in our love and care for the species he made as part of his Creation. It is all a part of appreciating and worshiping him, for he gave us these wonderful beasts! So who knows whether that kind of love could continue in the New Creation? But it wouldn't be inconsistent with what I believe about God. In any event, part of being "lost in wonder, love and praise" toward our Lord and God is the awe and joy at what he has created. It all is a reflection of his wondrous qualities.

Beautifully expressed, Rosie. I agree. After all, care of His creation is a responsibility that God charged Adam with. One thing I am sure of is that our God will do exceedingly abundantly beyond all we can ask or imagine.

Every blessing,

Alan

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114657#Comment_114657

All this meaningless debate of the Soteriology of Animals, and whether animals have souls, while we have a world of Sinners who do have souls, sliding down that slippery slope to Hell.. forgive me, but how many people that we know or come into contact with.. will die in there sins without hearing the Gospel while the "church" at large continues to have this meaningless debate.

I agree there are more important things we could be talking about. But precisely this kind of conversation is one of the things that brings people into the Kingdom of God. If non-believers see us running around being totally intent merely on warning people about the dangers of hell and trying to save souls from that terror, not caring about anything beyond that narrowest definition of God's concerns, they will be turned off from this whole God thing and our efforts will be in vain. However people are wooed towards him when they hear of a God who cares about creatures they care about. It's not just about what we are saved from but what we are saved to / towards / into / for that makes believing in Jesus as Lord and Saviour so exciting and worthwhile! Abundant eternal life, not just avoiding the slippery slope to Hell, important though the latter may be. From Luther's Works, Volume 25: "God also converts those whom He converts with a view of His goodness. And this is the only way to achieve a true conversion, namely, through love and kindness. For he who is converted through threats and terror is never truly converted as long as he retains that form of conversion. For fear makes him hate his conversion."

William

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114627#Comment_114627

And if I get to heaven and find that my dear Cricket isn't there

Rosie,

Is Cricket a GSP? When I was growing up my family had 2 GSP's. One was Lady and the other was Spectre. Cricket reminds me highly of Lady. Lady made it to 16 years then cancer got her. I want all my "best friends" with me in heaven.

Paul Golder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114680#Comment_114680

All I know is that if animals are going to heaven, I will have a lot of angry livestock to answer to.

Especially the young ones, after all of the veal and lamb that I have eaten. [:|]

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114665#Comment_114665

I had a wonderful dog (actually very similar to Cricket in appearance) called Tim. He was faithful and loyal (most of the time), but knew right from wrong. In other words he could tell the difference between dog biscuits in his bowl, and a chocolate cake cooling on a shelf in the kitchen - though he didn't always make the right choices!

So he was faithful and loyal - but he was utterly godless. So far as I was able to tell he never thought of God, never prayed to God, never worshipped God, never thanked God. If heaven was fully of doggy biscuits (or chocolate cake!) he might like it there. But a heaven that's all about God is not for him.

I used to have a fairly similar view of heaven -- i.e., that it is a non-physical disembodied existence of just praising and worshiping God. I've changed my views on that over time, due in no small part to the explanations I've read from a growing number of Bible expositors and theologians I know who see heaven / the coming eschatological Kingdom / the New Jerusalem as an extension and renewal of God's good Creation. Isaiah 65; 66:22, 2 Peter 3:13; and Rev 21 all talk about a new heaven (or heavens) and a new earth. The New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven (Rev 21:2), and "God’s dwelling place is now among the people" (Rev 21:3). It is passages like these, and the Christian belief in the resurrection of the body (based on Scripture, e.g., Matt. 27:52; Rom. 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:35, 42–44; Phil. 3:21), that make people like Gordon Fee and NT Wright teach us to rethink the whole traditional idea of an ethereal heaven where just our souls reside. I believe that in the New Creation, all the good things about this creation that God intended from the beginning (plants, animals, sunlight, etc.) will be present and recognizeable in some way (Jesus' resurrected body did not look like a spirit; even though the disciples walking along the Emmaus road with him didn't recognize him as Jesus at first, they took him to be a stranger from out of town, which they wouldn't have if he'd been some non-physical being without a body). I don't know that individual non-human created beings (specific dogs, etc.) will be the same as the ones they were on earth. Perhaps not. But these aspects of God's creation didn't sin against him and fall, so their need to be recreated is only due to how we have marred them through our sin.

Woah! There's absolutely no way heaven is "a non-physical disembodied existence". I 100% do not believe that. Of course I believe in physical resurrection and the physical re-creation of the new heavens and the new earth. The question was not whether there would be animals in heaven. The question was whether my now deceased dog was going to be in heaven.

Jonathan West

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114687#Comment_114687

http://ref.ly/Co1.20 is perhaps relevant to the general question - God's purpose in Jesus was to "save" the entire creation ... although not in a universalist sense (i.e. not every individual human soul, as is clear from the many passages on final judgment) ... God created the world and it was very good ... and a Christian's hope is not "going to heaven" but partaking in the new creation.

While we cannot know what that is like exactly, given the references to a new heaven and earth etc. it must be at least recognisable in terms of the current created heavens and earth. So presumably it will include (recreated) animals.

So does God's interest in "saving" animals in Jonah relate to his eschatological purpose in Jesus to reconcile creation?

Alain Maashe

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114684#Comment_114684

All I know is that if animals are going to heaven, I will have a lot of angry livestock to answer to.

Especially the young ones, after all of the veal and lamb that I have eaten.

Will my favorite chicken, rat, snake, roach, mosquito, vermin, bacteria be in heaven?

if pets make it to heaven, shouldn't we expect all animal life to make it ? scary thought

Will they be given an imperishable body since flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50)

Will there be a resurrection for the animal kingdom?

did Jesus die for their sins too?

will we eat steak in heaven?

I am told that the book of Hezekiah as valuable proof-text on the topic

Alain

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114687#Comment_114687

Woah! There's absolutely no way heaven is "a non-physical disembodied existence". I 100% do not believe that. Of course I believe in physical resurrection and the physical re-creation of the new heavens and the new earth. The question was not whether there would be animals in heaven. The question was whether my now deceased dog was going to be in heaven.

I'm so sorry, I misunderstood. I thought by your last paragraph that the reason you didn't believe your dog would be in heaven was that heaven was all about God, and dogs are not into thinking about or worshiping God so there is no reason for them to be in heaven. Maybe you meant that your particular dog was utterly godless.

Mine, though she didn't understand theology or who God is from a human perspective, taught me more about faith and trusting in God than many human teachers have. When I would take her to the beach and throw sticks out into the water for her to fetch over and over again, she would bring them back to me and then go stand patiently at the edge of the water, looking out into the sea expectantly, out in the direction where she'd need to jump to go fetch the next stick, trustnig that I would throw it and throw it out there. Many dogs will keep looking back at you and bugging you until you throw the stick, but no Cricket. She would stand there looking away from me and waiting patiently.. That taught me about patience and about trusting God, keeping my eye on the road where he wants me to go, not constantly turning around to see if he's there, but trusting that he is and knowing that he knows where he's leading me.

When she was slowly declining towards death (and I think she must have known it at some level), she taught me so much about the preciousness of life. She couldn't walk very well anymore towards the end, so I'd carry her out the door and down the front step. I'd support her back legs while she peed. Then we would sit out on the front lawn together for hours. She'd watch people walk by, sniff the air and enjoy the breeze and the smells, and be content to just be alive. I didn't have the heart to take that from her so I took care of her to the very end and she died naturally in her bed. I still cry when I think about her sometimes. It's been two years. It was heartbreaking losing her, but also the most profound time of God's nearness to me that I've ever gone through. I prayed with her and for her. I'm sure it was meaningless to her, but she sensed my love and care for her. I told her it was OK for her to let go whenever she was ready; I didn't want her clinging to life just for me if she was no longer wanting to keep going. I'm sure she didn't understand any of that either. But it helped me. And God was so good through it all. Oh man, I'm bawling again now...

So, while I'm at peace with the idea that Cricket might not be in heaven now or ever, I do hope I see her again someday. She was an amazing dog. Irreplaceable.

Jonathan West

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114627#Comment_114627

And if I get to heaven and find that my dear Cricket isn't there

Another fan of the great game?[;)]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114710#Comment_114710

Rosie,

Is Cricket a GSP? When I was growing up my family had 2 GSP's. One was Lady and the other was Spectre. Cricket reminds me highly of Lady. Lady made it to 16 years then cancer got her. I want all my "best friends" with me in heaven.

No, she was a purebred black labrador retriever. She went very gray in her old age; actually that started when she was about 4 and went very gradually to near white around her muzzle and front paws. She lived to 17, and it was cancer that got her as well.

By the way, for all you dog lovers out there, a wonderful little book: Dogspell: A Dogmatic Theology on the Abounding Love of God by Mary Ellen Ashcroft.

Alan Macgregor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114710#Comment_114710

I took care of her to the very end and she died naturally in her bed. I still cry when I think about her sometimes. It's been two years. It was heartbreaking losing her, but also the most profound time of God's nearness to me that I've ever gone through. I prayed with her and for her. I'm sure it was meaningless to her, but she sensed my love and care for her. I told her it was OK for her to let go whenever she was ready; I didn't want her clinging to life just for me if she was no longer wanting to keep going. I'm sure she didn't understand any of that either. But it helped me. And God was so good through it all. Oh man, I'm bawling again now...

Rosie,

Your words touched my heart, for I have been there! When Cuchlan Ban died I was without a dog for almost five years. My wife was very patient with me, though she wanted to get another dog, I just wasn't ready. Then we got Samwise from the Golden Retriever Rescue Unit, for though we had always had puppies, I was so grateful for all that I had received from my Goldens that I "wanted to put something back". He was 19 months old when we got him and, though I don't think he had been abused, he was very neglected. It took a long time to win his trust, but now after five years he is our dog and I wouldn't be without him now.

I think we learn a great deal about ourselves from our animals – about patience (or lack of it), about trust (or lack of it), about dependence. I also learned a great deal from a book I read many years ago – Lessons from a Sheepdog by Philip Keller.

BTW I always tell my grieving folks that tears are fine. I believe that God gives us tears to express what we cannot put into words.

Every blessing

Alan

TCBlack

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114730#Comment_114730

I'm intrigued at the level of passion people place in animals. I'm a very utilitarian kind of guy. Even the pets I've owned caused me no tears at their death. (Note that my wife disagrees with me intensely on this, and still get's a sad look on her face when she thinks about her past pets.)

Perhaps it's due to my allergies (probably is) but I have never garnered an emotional connection to an animal - and I struggle with why anyone would. And before you ask, yes I've had dogs, a few cats, an iguana, a black lab rat and who knows what else (do fish count?) I've just never had an emotional attachment to an animal.

Curious. I feel like a Vulcan all of a sudden.

Floyd Johnson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114733#Comment_114733

Curious. I feel like a Vulcan all of a sudden.

Might want to check your ears. [:)]

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114656#Comment_114656

If Pancho doesn't make it I'm going to cry.

That picture still looks as if Pancho is saying, "Why did you make me wear this outfit?" [:D]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114718#Comment_114718

By the way, for all you dog lovers out there, a wonderful little book: Dogspell: A Dogmatic Theology on the Abounding Love of God by Mary Ellen Ashcroft.

Another good one is The Gospel According to Brodie: Lessons from a Blind Labrador by Jennifer Rees Larcombe (Zondervan). The author is the mother of a friend of mine.

God sometimes comes to us in unexpected ways and uses the simple things of this world to teach us life-shaping truths. During the long and difficult years of a disabling illness, and following her dramatic recovery, Jennifer Reed Larcombe learned unforgettable lessons from three very special companions--her dogs. Of these, it was Brodie, the blind Labrador, who opened Jennifer's eyes to the nature of her own relationship with God.

Paul Golder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114684#Comment_114684

All I know is that if animals are going to heaven, I will have a lot of angry livestock to answer to.

Especially the young ones, after all of the veal and lamb that I have eaten.

Something else I was thinking:

What of some Christian around the world that have no qualms when it comes to the nutritional merit of domesticated animals...

Pat Flanakin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114656#Comment_114656

Quickly, since a mediator must be equal with both parties in the mediation, how is Christ an animal, human being, and God? The Scriptures never state that Christ came to save animals, but only human beings.

If we are to go and make disciples, how does anyone preach to an animal about who and what Christ is? How does that animal tell you that they have believed in Christ as Savior?

Animals are part of the earth that is to be subdued and utilized for man's purposes; as well as appreciated as part of God's lower creation on the earth under man.

Outside of the fact that all of God's creation should be respected, it should be used for its intended use and nothing else added.

If a verse discusses the saving of animals, then it simply means that those may be saved from death as part of a civilization being saved from death on earth, not eternity.

ONLY MAN IS MADE IN GOD'S IMAGE, NOT ANIMALS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pat Flanakin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114785#Comment_114785

Oh, by the way, what kinds of animals you eat is your business. I do not see anything forbidden for food of the animal kingdom now that we are no longer under the Law.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114785#Comment_114785

If we are to go and make disciples, how does anyone preach to an animal...

Good question. I dunno. St. Francis of Assisi seems to have figured that out somehow... [;)]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114785#Comment_114785

If we are to go and make disciples, how does anyone preach to an animal about who and what Christ is? How does that animal tell you that they have believed in Christ as Savior?

Oh, and there's also this one...

A Baptist missionary was walking in Africa when he heard the ominous padding of a lion behind him. "Oh Lord," prayed the missionary, "Grant in Thy goodness that the lion walking behind me is a good Christian lion."

And then, in the silence that followed, the missionary heard the lion praying too: "Oh Lord," he prayed, "I thank Thee for the food which I am about to receive."

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114785#Comment_114785

If we are to go and make disciples, how does anyone preach to an animal about who and what Christ is? How does that animal tell you that they have believed in Christ as Savior?

Aren't you assuming that the animals participated in the great fall? If they have not participated in sin but only suffered the consequences of human sins ... Just musing a line of thought not promoting a theological stance on the issue.

nicky crane

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114791#Comment_114791

Jesus did indirectly save Petri, above, and Andi, below, by calling me to come and live in this village in Albania. Had I not wanted 2 puppies, urgently, after the traumatic death of their predecessor, Jani, Petri, as being the less attractive pup, would have been exposed and left to die with his sisters before he was 2 days old, and Andi would have been kept by the family and loved, but would have lived out his days on the end of a chain.

On Easter Sunday I took Petri in the car and out of the village for the first time in his life, to walk on the mountain. We met the Maltese brothers on their way home. They invited me for an Easter visit. Petri now entered a house for the first time in his life. While I enjoyed and Easter drink and chocolate, one of the brothers treated Petri to some cheese. So I evangelised him: Petri, you won't understand this, but we are celebrating the resurrection of Jesus.

When I talk to our children about the way God created us different from the animals, we talk about Andi and Petri being very good, but they don't come to learn about Jesus because God has not made them able to understand about God and relate to him. I also point out that a person who turns their back on God becomes worse than an animal.

I dearly love my dogs and cats, and I know God loves them more than I do. But I believe the life they have here on earth is all for them. I'm not expecting to meet them again in Heaven - though I should be delighted to be proved wrong!

At school I asked a visiting missioner if animals went to Heaven. He started talking about Jesus. I wanted to say: I'm not interested in Jesus, I want to know about my guineapig, but didn't dare to be so disarmingly honest...

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114590#Comment_114590

Dewayne, no worries there, your dogs will be with ours and we can all have a great time. God is good. Randy Alcorn in his book, "Heaven" believes that pets/animals will be in heaven or more theologically correct, on the New Earth. Here's our photogenic Retriever.

Floyd Johnson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114942#Comment_114942

Bo Dandy attended church for three years regularly before he became a member of our family. I do not know about his sins, but his skin sure became "white as snow".

(‾◡◝)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114767#Comment_114767

This whole thread reminds me of the old Wittenburg Door and "Dogs Who Know the Lord."

Let's see ... any scriptural suggestion of Federal Headship in the animal world?

Was there ever that ONE Bowser who represented all of his progeny who, through his bad dogginess, plunged the entire pack into death? What law did he break in order to plunge his race into death? Of any tree in the garden thou may freely mark but of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad-dog thou mayest not mark. For in the day that thou markest thereon, thou shalt surely die.

Or, can anyone identify the Divine Dog, incarnate in flesh, who died as a propitiary substitute for his pack? Can we say, therefore, just as through one dog sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all dogs, because all sinned ... but the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of Divine Dog and the gift by the grace of the one abound to the many.

I didn't think so.

So, if Scripture is silent on such things as whether or not animals go to heaven, so should we be. Emotions and exegesis don't mix very well. Ruf.

TCBlack

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/115043#Comment_115043

Emotions and exegesis don't mix very well.

Thanks JRS,

Without a doubt, this is the most quotable segment of the thread.