Do animals go to heaven?
Charlie Wilkes
with comforting stories about a Rainbow Bridge that our pets cross
over after death, where they wait for us to die so they can join us in
heaven.
Is it true, or are we just kidding ourselves?
Charlie
Marilyn
"Charlie Wilkes" <charlie...@users.easynews.com> wrote in message
news:pbhjh1latdik7tc9r...@4ax.com...
For the purposes of rec.pets.cats.anecdote, what does it matter?
As long as it makes you feel better, do it, think it, believe it.
whayface
wrote:
I was watching world renouned tel-evangelist John Hagee one day and he said that he firmly
believed that there will be a place in heaven for pets and I believe him.
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Charlie Wilkes wrote:
Hmmmm.... Why don't you try to cross it, and let us know
from the other side?
Trish
"Charlie Wilkes" <charlie...@users.easynews.com> wrote in message
news:pbhjh1latdik7tc9r...@4ax.com...
LOL thanks Charlie, I needed this laugh today, say hi to Tweakers and
Holly for me, I still love his stripes
pawpal6
them mention the presence of pets on the other side. Why would God create
such extraordinary creatures if He didn't want us to reunite with them.
Charlie Wilkes
wrote:
>I have read a number of accounts of "near death experiences" and all of
>them mention the presence of pets on the other side. Why would God create
>such extraordinary creatures if He didn't want us to reunite with them.
I don't know. Why did God create dracunculiasis?
http://asylumeclectica.com/malady/archives/dracun.htm
Charlie
Lisa .
heaven. If they weren't there then I'd say you didn't go to heaven!!
James
>Re: Do animals go to heaven?
Charlie,
Looks like it is kidding time. The Bible shows us that unreasoning
animals were made to die, not live forever. 2 Pe 2:12,
"But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are
like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and
destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish." (NIV)
Also notice Ps 49:20,
"A man who has riches without understanding is like the beasts that
perish." (NIV)
But did you know that the Bible tells us that not all good people will
go to Heaven? For example, how could Jesus' statement be true here, if
ALL the good ones went to Heaven? Mt 5:5,
"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth." (NIV)
More on what the Bible has to say on this subject if you are
interested.
Sincerely, James
Fat Freddy
<ar...@surfbest.net> wrote:
> >Charlie Wilkes <charlie...@users.easynews.com>
>
> >Re: Do animals go to heaven?
>
> >Over here in rec.pets.cats.anecdotes, we like to console each other
> >with comforting stories about a Rainbow Bridge that our pets cross
> >over after death, where they wait for us to die so they can join us in
> >heaven.
> >
> >Is it true, or are we just kidding ourselves?
> >
> >Charlie
Maybe someday mankind will outgrow the need to invent gods and
religions and realize that all we have is the earth and each other. If
that day ever comes, we can love and respect all species equally. We
might even learn to love the Human species instead of constantly
striving to make ourselves extinct.
meee
more so than what you have said. I am apractising Christian, and prefer to
err on the side of grace rather than judgement. Mainly from the point of
view that we 'interpret' the scriptures too much to support our own
opinions. Our point of view isn't necessarily the right one; I am not saying
the scripture you quoted were incorrect; but as centuries of
mis-interpreting scripture to make christianity a male dominated religion
has driven many women away, i would be hesitant to 'pass judgement' on a
subject that is mentioned in so many different ways in the bible. for
example; everyone know of the scripture that speaks of heaven "...the lion
will lie down with the lamb, etc etc". And to Charlie; a scripture I read
was Ecclesiastes chapter 3 verses18-21 if you can find a bible, I suggest
you read the whole thin, it may shed a bit of light: but the main one that
got to me was verse 20 and 21 from that section: " All go to the same place;
all come from the dust and to dust all return. Who knows if the spirit of
man rises upwards and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?"
These seems to me to be saying 'who are we to know or decide...it's just as
likely either way...' ie. it's known to God, ask him. And as for where you
will go after death, I am not going to push any more onto you unless you
ask, and will not annoy this group any further with my beliefs. My apology
for offending anyone, or off topic posting, however I felt obliged to
present another christian point of view from james'...no offense to james,
however not everyone sees God the same way.
Bobcat
"James" <ar...@surfbest.net> wrote in message
news:tgsqk1dvb3l6vop6n...@4ax.com...
This is not intended to offend people who follow the Christian faith - I was
baptized into it as a young adult but since then have also drawn from other
faiths to form my own beliefs. As for the Bible, I don't view it as a direct
pipeline to the word of God. The Bible has been written - and rewritten - by
humans, each one of them influenced by personal biases and prevailing
attitudes of the day. It's been translated into countless versions, over and
over, down the years, each time at the mercy of the skill - or its lack - of
the scholars and translators. Finally, the Bible is taken up by modern-day
Christians in its present form and quoted as, well, gospel. Every word.
Every concept. Paraded out to make points, or win arguments. Who truly knows
if animals are "unreasoning"? Or if there is a heaven - or indeed a rainbow
bridge? Some matters are completely beyond our temporal comprehension, and
will always be so. Shakespeare's Hamlet nailed it: "There are more things in
heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
meee
"Bobcat" <bob_cat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kkg3f.4773$vD4.3...@news20.bellglobal.com...
I'd have to agree with you on that :) As a christian, i do believe the bible
to be the true word of god etc etc....however i also believe like you, that
it is often misinterpreted and 'edited' to suit our own world view. I
believe that God speaks to everyone, and we shoudln't judge other's beliefs
or opinions just because 'this verse in the bible says (or we think it does)
it's wrong' After all, if the bible was the word of god, who are we to
'interpret' what it says? wouldn't it be beyond our own judgement, and
shouldn't it be used more for our own improvement, instead of 'Improving'
others? (as I am sure you, as well as myself and many others have been at
the recieving end of many times)
Dore
Of course animals go to heaven, as well as hell. Regardless of what the
mainstream believes, animals DO have souls and their souls are eternal as
well. Another truth that most Christians are unaware of, is that sometimes
animals are the incarnation of HUMAN souls too, depending upon their choices
in previous lives.
--
Dore
"James" <ar...@surfbest.net> wrote in message
news:tgsqk1dvb3l6vop6n...@4ax.com...
Yoj
news:kkg3f.4773$vD4.3...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
Your view of the Bible coincides with mine, and I'm a regular churchgoer.
If you want to quote the Bible, what about the part that says the lion shall
lie down with the lamb? If there are lions and lambs, there have to be dogs
and cats. Besides, if there are no animals in heaven, I ain't going! ;-)
Joy
meee
"Yoj" <joyga...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Dxh3f.16154$6e1....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
ditto!! and if i'm not much mistaken, god would probably clear out too;
there's also mention of trees etc, so i'm looking forward to having a good
garden!! Look at st francis of assisi! Now there's a guy i would have liked!
RAP
what makes men and animals differ.
Animals rely on their own insticts to survive. An animal thousands of years
ago when compared to that animal of the same kind today are still doing the
same thing. Eagles still build the same nest, beavers build the same dam.
Their sexual activity is also instinct.
Since man has spirit, it enables him to think, invent, learn new things, can
even control the course of nature.
create ways to improve himself, but most of all, they are born to love,
emotional ,worship God, pray.
In Genesis, it says after God has created the earth and everything on it (
including the animals ),
He created man IN HIS OWN IMAGE.( with body and spirit)
"James" <ar...@surfbest.net> wrote in message
news:tgsqk1dvb3l6vop6n...@4ax.com...
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Dore wrote:
>>>Charlie Wilkes <charlie...@users.easynews.com>
>>
>>>Re: Do animals go to heaven?
>>
>
> Of course animals go to heaven, as well as hell. Regardless of what the
> mainstream believes, animals DO have souls and their souls are eternal as
> well. Another truth that most Christians are unaware of, is that sometimes
> animals are the incarnation of HUMAN souls too, depending upon their choices
> in previous lives.
I'm reminded of a delightful Rudyard Kipling story! (Was it
"Rikki-Tikki-Tavi"?)
>
>
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
James wrote:
>>Charlie Wilkes <charlie...@users.easynews.com>
>
>
>>Re: Do animals go to heaven?
>
>
>>Over here in rec.pets.cats.anecdotes, we like to console each other
>>with comforting stories about a Rainbow Bridge that our pets cross
>>over after death, where they wait for us to die so they can join us in
>>heaven.
>>
>>Is it true, or are we just kidding ourselves?
>>
>>Charlie
>
>
> Charlie,
>
> Looks like it is kidding time. The Bible shows us that unreasoning
> animals were made to die, not live forever. 2 Pe 2:12,
So? SFAIK, ALL living creatures die, "reasoning" or not.
(And it's plain to see you've never known any cats
intimately, if you consider them "unreasoning" - a lot of
them are clever enough to outwit a good many humans!)
There are other religions than "fundamentalist"
Christianity, and other "holy" books, you know. FYI, even
EDUCATED biblical scholars can't agree on the meaning of
much of its contents, what makes YOU such an authority?
This newsgroup (rec.pets.cats.anecdotes) has quite a few
non-Christian members - Jews and Moslems and Budhists and
Sikhs and Wiccans (and atheists, of course). One reason we
all get along (most of the time) is that we don't try to
force our personal religious beliefs on the others here. I
suggest you follow that example. Religion is a very
PERSONAL thing - no one has the right to impose his/her
belief system on anyone else. (Particularly when you
weren't invited to do so!)
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
RAP wrote:
> No Animals don't go to heaven because they don't have spirit.. The spirit is
> what makes men and animals differ.
I beg to differ! Most of the animals I've known have far
finer souls than the likes of YOU!
meee
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dikg8...@news2.newsguy.com...
And I am one of the christian members, who happens to believ that, as god
wrote it, not us, who are we to tell anyone what we think god meant by such
and such a verse, taken out of context to prove a point? and wouldn't god
explain it to you, or do you need a whole committee of self-righteous
scholars to tell you what they think it means??
meee
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dikge...@news2.newsguy.com...
Oh good! I'm not the only crazy person out there who still reads kipling!!!
RAP
spirit.
Anyway, not all men go to Heaven. They make their choice to go to Hell.
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dikgg...@news2.newsguy.com...
wafflycat
>
> So? SFAIK, ALL living creatures die, "reasoning" or not. (And it's plain
> to see you've never known any cats intimately, if you consider them
> "unreasoning" - a lot of them are clever enough to outwit a good many
> humans!)
A gentle reminder folks, the thread is being crossposted, and we know what
that leads to (g)
a bit of trolling, methinks. How about ignoring the trolls & avoiding
crossposting? :)
Cheers, helen s
Bobcat
"meee" <efam...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:npk3f.16603$U51....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Count me in too. Many people today Kipple. He's unfashionable today, so some
are closet Kipplers!
Bobcat
"wafflycat" <waffles*$*A**T*v21net$*ŁŁ*D*O*T*co*DŁ$Ł*O*T*uk> wrote in
message news:434e...@news.greennet.net...
I was thinking that myself, Helen. That's why I, like you, only sent my
initial response to RPCA, and deleted the other newsgroups. That only leads
to trouble.
Libertarius
the SKY.
The Russians sent some dogs, the US sent some chimpanzees
and even rats, etc. -- L.
Markwise
The problem with this thought is that you're creating the notion that
animals have a spirit/soul which they do not and Scripture never says
they do. This goes back to Creation, God creates all the plants and
animals by His Word. He created mankind specially and different from
the animals in that we have a soul.
Thus, without a soul to speak of, animals are no more eternal, no more
capable of heaven or hell, than plants and rocks and the like.
Hope that clarifies.
Bobcat
news:Dxh3f.16154$6e1....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
Amen to that! And we're not alone in our opinion, according to these
quotations.
"Heaven will not ever Heaven be unless my cats are there to welcome me." --
Epitaph in pet cemetery
"If I have any beliefs about immortality it is that dogs I know will go to
heaven, and very very few people." - James Thurber
"Many years ago when an adored dog died, a great friend, a bishop, said to
me, 'You must always remember that, as far as the Bible is concerned, God
only threw the humans out of Paradise.'" - Unknown
"Many birds and beasts are ... as fit to go to Heaven as many human beings -
people who talk of their seats there with as much confidence as if they had
booked them at a box-office." - English essayist, poet and editor Leigh Hunt
"There is an Indian legend which says when a human dies there is a bridge
they must cross to enter into heaven. At the head of that bridge waits every
animal that human encountered during their lifetime. The animals, based upon
what they know of this person, decide which humans may cross the bridge....
and which are turned away." - Unknown
- The Rainbow Bridge, perhaps? And finally, Mark Twain. He calls our cats
and other creatures - not mankind - "the higher animals".
"Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only
animal that has the True Religion--several of them. He is the only animal
that loves his neighbour as himself and cuts his throat if his theology
isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest
best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven....The higher
animals have no religion. And we are told that they are going to be left out
in the Hereafter. I wonder why? It seems questionable taste." - from "The
Lowest Animal", an essay from "Mark Twain on the Damned Human Race"
Markwise
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
> There are other religions than "fundamentalist"
> Christianity, and other "holy" books, you know. FYI, even
> EDUCATED biblical scholars can't agree on the meaning of
> much of its contents, what makes YOU such an authority?
>
> This newsgroup (rec.pets.cats.anecdotes) has quite a few
> non-Christian members - Jews and Moslems and Budhists and
> Sikhs and Wiccans (and atheists, of course). One reason we
> all get along (most of the time) is that we don't try to
> force our personal religious beliefs on the others here. I
> suggest you follow that example. Religion is a very
> PERSONAL thing - no one has the right to impose his/her
> belief system on anyone else. (Particularly when you
> weren't invited to do so!)
I would gather that you have no belief in the reality of absolute
truth?
I know there are people who do indeed *impose* their beliefs on you or
another. *However* confessing what one believes to be the truth in a
public forum is not imposing that belief on anyone else. If people
don't stick up for what they believe in then what's the point. If
people can't look at the Bible, for example, and say that this or that
is true then what's the point. Saying something publicly isn't always
imposing it upon someone else. If we're going to be that
hypersensitive about speech then we're getting dangerously close to
throwing the 1st Amendment out the window.
Just my humble opinion.
Monique Y. Mudama
Markwise penned:
>
> The problem with this thought is that you're creating the notion
> that animals have a spirit/soul which they do not and Scripture
> never says they do. This goes back to Creation, God creates all the
> plants and animals by His Word. He created mankind specially and
> different from the animals in that we have a soul.
>
> Thus, without a soul to speak of, animals are no more eternal, no
> more capable of heaven or hell, than plants and rocks and the like.
>
> Hope that clarifies.
As a non-Christian, practicing or otherwise, I have to wonder why I am
being subject to this cross-posting mess. I think it started with a
troll.
Regardless, I don't see how it matters, unless you are using an
animal's supposed lack of soul as an excuse for inflicting pain on an
animal.
--
monique
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
meee wrote:
Well, with the exception of the "Puck of Pook's Hill" series
(which were aimed more at young adults than at children, I
think), Kipling WROTE for adults. Also, he was hardly an
example of the "Britsh Raj" mentality, despite being given
that reputation by people who never READ him!
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
RAP wrote:
> What souls are you talking about. The body is the soul itself, not the
> spirit.
That may make sense to you, but I seriously doubt it does to
anyone else! SFAIK, "spirit" and "soul" are more-or-less
synonymous, and neither has any physical connection with
"the body"! (Are you so ignorant you confuse "soul" with
the physical portion of animal anatomy known as "mind" or
"brain"?)
> Anyway, not all men go to Heaven. They make their choice to go to Hell.
Well, judging by the kind of people you apparently approve,
the COMPANY must certainly be better in Hell! You speak of
"men" - what about women? (Or are you one of those redneck
chauvinists who consider us property, with no identities of
our own?)
Food for thought (assuming you are capable of it):
If there are no animals in "Heaven", perhaps its residents
are not where they THINK they are? ("If there ain't no cats
in Heaven, I ain't going!")
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
wafflycat wrote:
Sorry, Helen - I simply see red when these ignorant,
uneducated clods start parroting their unreasoned platitudes!
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
any "religious" newsgroups for intelligent, educated adults
with the ability to actually THINK? I heard those same
asinine platitudes in my Methodist Sunday School (more years
ago than most of you can count). I thought they were a load
of unproven crap then, and a lifetime of practical
experience has only confirmed my initial impression (ad
nauseum and ad infinitum).
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Markwise wrote:
>
> I would gather that you have no belief in the reality of absolute
> truth?
"Absolute truth" implies provable by repetition (i.e. the
same circumstances infallibly produce the same results -
also known as the "scientific method"). Since "belief" (by
its very nature) is a subjective phenomenon, only the
ignorant can confuse their personal "belief" with "absolute
truth". I'm told there are still people who believe the
world is flat - they claim that photographs from space
proving the contrary were somehow "faked". Denying
scientific FACT doesn't make it less so. Frail human
scientists - like Galileo - can be tortured until they
officially recant, but "eppur si muove".
>
> I know there are people who do indeed *impose* their beliefs on you or
> another. *However* confessing what one believes to be the truth in a
> public forum is not imposing that belief on anyone else.
It certainly is if no one ASKED for your opinion! (Or
particularly cares, one way or the other.)
> If people
> don't stick up for what they believe in then what's the point.
More and more wars labeled "holy crusades"? Depends upon
how far you're prepared to go to "defend" your personal
belief system.
> If
> people can't look at the Bible, for example, and say that this or that
> is true then what's the point.
"People" DO - ad nauseum! Does that mean every ignorant
hick's "interpretation" is TRUE? Hardly! The fact is that
"biblical" meaning is frequently ambiguous. Much of your
bible (even a goodly portion of the New Testament) was
handed down by "word of mouth" for generations before it was
written down (with the concommitant possibility of "editing"
to suit the teller's viewpoints and opinions). Even in our
modern world, with open-minded, educated people seeking
scientific proof, many biblical scholars (with the
education to read the languages of its earliest written
sources) often disagree about the "truth" of alleged facts
and the actual time-frames involved - how much more about
what it says (and what may have been left out)?
> Saying something publicly isn't always
> imposing it upon someone else.
If you say "I believe that.....", it's not. If you say "the
bible says such-and-such, therefore it is true, and no one
should ever question it" is definitely imposing your views
on others.
> If we're going to be that
> hypersensitive about speech then we're getting dangerously close to
> throwing the 1st Amendment out the window.
To argue for scientific proof of unsubstantiated allegations
endangers the First Ammendment? The current tendency to
return our nation to the dark ages of "that old-time
religion" seems far more likely to do that!
>
> Just my humble opinion.
Funny, you sound pretty arrogant to me! (And certainly do
not belong in rec.pets.cats.anecdotes - why don't you
return to your own newsgroup and leave ours alone?)
>
Dore
news:VRi3f.135507$qY1.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> No Animals don't go to heaven because they don't have spirit.. The spirit
> is what makes men and animals differ.
> Animals rely on their own insticts to survive. An animal thousands of
> years ago when compared to that animal of the same kind today are still
> doing the same thing. Eagles still build the same nest, beavers build the
> same dam. Their sexual activity is also instinct.
> Since man has spirit, it enables him to think, invent, learn new things,
> can even control the course of nature.
> create ways to improve himself, but most of all, they are born to love,
> emotional ,worship God, pray.
The spirit is what gives people their emotions. Animals also have emotions,
thus they have spirits as well. They have a soul, because having a soul
means that you have life, and obviously animals are alive. Animals do NOT go
by instinct, but by choice. That is what makes them trainable. They think,
feel, learn, love, fear, etc and the only difference is that they do not
have the higher intellect and reasoning that humans do, but in fact, are
more in tune with the spiritual aspect than humans. And since God gave
humans a greater intellect, they compensated animals with other abilities,
for example, dogs can smell even the remotest of odors, eagles can see great
distances etc. all better than humans. Animals sense things better than
humans, for example, can tell when an earthquake is about to hit, or when
someone is in danger. Animals can FEEL your emotions and your thoughts,
better than humans can. Their sexual activity is also because of spirit
influence, just as it in humans. Animals build nests and dams because that
is what they can do with what they have available to them, as their needs be
and what they are capable of.
You don't give animals enough credit and it is thinking such as yours, is
why many animals are neglected, abused and treated badly by humans.
--
Dore
"RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
news:VRi3f.135507$qY1.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Dore
> What souls are you talking about. The body is the soul itself, not the
> spirit.
Your soul is what gives you life.
Gen 2:7
7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into
his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
KJV
Animals have life, thus they have souls.
--
Dore
"RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
news:bMm3f.136125$qY1....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Markwise
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
> Markwise wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I would gather that you have no belief in the reality of absolute
> > truth?
>
> "Absolute truth" implies provable by repetition (i.e. the
> same circumstances infallibly produce the same results -
> also known as the "scientific method"). Since "belief" (by
> its very nature) is a subjective phenomenon, only the
> ignorant can confuse their personal "belief" with "absolute
> truth". I'm told there are still people who believe the
> world is flat - they claim that photographs from space
> proving the contrary were somehow "faked". Denying
> scientific FACT doesn't make it less so. Frail human
> scientists - like Galileo - can be tortured until they
> officially recant, but "eppur si muove".
No, absolute truth implies precisely what the words say. Truth that is
absolute. By your means of reasoning then truth is the servant of
science alone. And quite honestly, I'd be surprised if you're ready to
admit that there is no truth outside of science.
The Bible is the absolute truth. Say what you want, but facts are
facts. Science is the servant of God and His Word.
> > I know there are people who do indeed *impose* their beliefs on you or
> > another. *However* confessing what one believes to be the truth in a
> > public forum is not imposing that belief on anyone else.
>
> It certainly is if no one ASKED for your opinion! (Or
> particularly cares, one way or the other.)
If you post in a newsgroup, you're asking for everyone's opinion unless
you state otherwise.
> > If people
> > don't stick up for what they believe in then what's the point.
>
> More and more wars labeled "holy crusades"? Depends upon
> how far you're prepared to go to "defend" your personal
> belief system.
I don't vouch for holy wars or anyone who promotes violence in the name
of religion. But that still doesn't answer the question, if people
don't stand for what they believe in then what's the point of believing
in anything? Our country was founded by people who stood up for what
they believed in...freedom. And I'd have to say their sacrifices were
worth it.
> > If
> > people can't look at the Bible, for example, and say that this or that
> > is true then what's the point.
>
> "People" DO - ad nauseum! Does that mean every ignorant
> hick's "interpretation" is TRUE? Hardly! The fact is that
> "biblical" meaning is frequently ambiguous. Much of your
> bible (even a goodly portion of the New Testament) was
> handed down by "word of mouth" for generations before it was
> written down (with the concommitant possibility of "editing"
> to suit the teller's viewpoints and opinions). Even in our
> modern world, with open-minded, educated people seeking
> scientific proof, many biblical scholars (with the
> education to read the languages of its earliest written
> sources) often disagree about the "truth" of alleged facts
> and the actual time-frames involved - how much more about
> what it says (and what may have been left out)?
The entire New Testament was down in writing before the last apostle
died around 90AD. An official canon was not finalized till later but
things were already written. So the term generations as you use it
would be inaccurate. Furthermore, the whole of the New Testament was
written by those who knew Christ in person, a very important fact to
the witness of their truth.
The primary teachings of Christ especially pertaining to salvation are
clear as night and day. That which pertains to our life and death in
Scripture is very clear. Thus an argument about the ambiguity of
Scripture holds no weight or purpose.
> > Saying something publicly isn't always
> > imposing it upon someone else.
>
> If you say "I believe that.....", it's not. If you say "the
> bible says such-and-such, therefore it is true, and no one
> should ever question it" is definitely imposing your views
> on others.
I would kindly disagree. Imposing such a view on you would be to do so
by force. Stating a public truth is not imposing it upon you.
> > If we're going to be that
> > hypersensitive about speech then we're getting dangerously close to
> > throwing the 1st Amendment out the window.
>
> To argue for scientific proof of unsubstantiated allegations
> endangers the First Ammendment? The current tendency to
> return our nation to the dark ages of "that old-time
> religion" seems far more likely to do that!
No, the hypersensitivity and intolerance of someone telling you they
are right and you are wrong endangers the First Amendment.
Dan M
> facts. Science is the servant of God and His Word.
Your last claim may be true. Your first is not. Nobody has ever been
able to prove to me that the bible is absolutely true. Many have tried,
all have failed. For you to claim that it is, and to insist that others
accept it as such based simply upon your statement is ludicrous.
> The primary teachings of Christ especially pertaining to salvation are
> clear as night and day. That which pertains to our life and death in
> Scripture is very clear. Thus an argument about the ambiguity of
> Scripture holds no weight or purpose.
Not true. If any passages of a document that is supposed to be the
"infallable word of God" are ambiguous, then the validity of the entire
documents is called into question.
> I would kindly disagree. Imposing such a view on you would be to do so
> by force. Stating a public truth is not imposing it upon you.
Sorry, bub, but you stating that the Bible is "public truth" is a
fallacy. You might accept it as truth, but there is no scientific proof
that it's true. I don't accept it as truth, and neither do a lot of
other very intelligent people.
> No, the hypersensitivity and intolerance of someone telling you they
> are right and you are wrong endangers the First Amendment.
Exactly. Isn't that what you're doing?
This is my one and only post on the subject. If anyone has any arguments
or disagreements, please send them via e-mail to avoid cluttering the
newsgroup.
RAP
Animals prey on one another. The bible says clean animals can be eaten but
unclean animals
should not. Read the bible about the clean and unclean animals.
...and there's no mention on the bible that animals go to heaven. Herbivores
and pets are usually eaten by predators that are carnivorous in nature. A
terrier or a doberman eaten by a mountain lion is digested in it's stomach
and that's the end of it. No way to go to heaven.
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dikgg...@news2.newsguy.com...
>
>
Yoj
message in this thread? As long as it is cross-posted, it is inviting an
invasion like the one we had a while ago.
--
Joy
**Don't believe everything you think**
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dimen...@news2.newsguy.com...
Annie Wxill
... Religion is a very
> PERSONAL thing - no one has the right to impose his/her belief system on
> anyone else. (Particularly when you weren't invited to do so!)
>
If you go back to the origination of this thread, you find that Charlie
Wilkes posed a question regarding the Rainbow Bridge to the religious groups
and in doing so, invited them to bring this religious discussion here.
(Note all the crossposting.) By answering someone's message and leaving in
the crossposting, you are, in effect continuing to bring the discussion here
and, most likely, providing Charlie with much amusement that his ploy is
successful.
For my response, I have removed all the cross posting from your message.
Annie
Dore
> Animals don't go to heaven whether they are good or bad, gentle or wild.
> Animals prey on one another. The bible says clean animals can be eaten but
> unclean animals
> should not. Read the bible about the clean and unclean animals.
> ...and there's no mention on the bible that animals go to heaven.
> Herbivores and pets are usually eaten by predators that are carnivorous in
> nature. A terrier or a doberman eaten by a mountain lion is digested in
> it's stomach and that's the end of it. No way to go to heaven.
What does any of this have to do with the souls and spirits of animals?
Obviously, everything you commented on is regarding the animal physical
bodies and has NOTHING to do with the subject at hand.
--
Dore
"RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
news:7%C3f.426425$5N3.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Libertarius
RAP wrote:
> Animals don't go to heaven whether they are good or bad, gentle or wild.
> Animals prey on one another. The bible says clean animals can be eaten but
> unclean animals
> should not. Read the bible about the clean and unclean animals.
> ...and there's no mention on the bible that animals go to heaven. Herbivores
> and pets are usually eaten by predators that are carnivorous in nature. A
> terrier or a doberman eaten by a mountain lion is digested in it's stomach
> and that's the end of it. No way to go to heaven.
===>So is a saintly missionary who is eaten by cannibals
"digested in [their] stomach." Is THAT the end of it? ;-) -- L.
RAP
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message
news:1129256181.fdec25deed91a76fa62abb3d8530dea4@teranews...
Man still has a spirit that separates from the body after death, so it's not
the end yet.
Animals when they die, since they don't have spirit, that's their end.
RAP
"Dore" <dorewil...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:OED3f.17608$RG1.6628@trndny08...
> "RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:7%C3f.426425$5N3.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> Animals don't go to heaven whether they are good or bad, gentle or wild.
>> Animals prey on one another. The bible says clean animals can be eaten
>> but unclean animals
>> should not. Read the bible about the clean and unclean animals.
>> ...and there's no mention on the bible that animals go to heaven.
>> Herbivores and pets are usually eaten by predators that are carnivorous
>> in nature. A terrier or a doberman eaten by a mountain lion is digested
>> in it's stomach and that's the end of it. No way to go to heaven.
>
> What does any of this have to do with the souls and spirits of animals?
> Obviously, everything you commented on is regarding the animal physical
> bodies and has NOTHING to do with the subject at hand.
I'm responding to the post's on the upper thread.
meee
"Bobcat" <bob_cat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:krs3f.5630$S43.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
I've been a closet kippler ever since i first kippled! humbug to disnep for
their bastardizations!!what's your fav? out of the one's i've read, it's
hard to pick but 'Kim' would have to be a fave...
meee
"Markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129226014....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I will have to agree to disagree with you. I am holding these 'self evident
truths' to be unsure until i feel that i believe them for myself, as i feel
it is foolish for someone to believe something because you have been
instructed to believe it all your life. I believe in other religions or
cults we refer to it as 'brainwashing'...until then, i do not want to pass
judgement on these things, or othe'r pov as i'm sure god knows and
understands where they're coming from and will sort it out with them in his
own time...as he does. I merely pointed out that there are other less
commonly quoted verses that might present a different ideology to the one
first expressed. There is another verse which i don't know the reference
tooo, i stumbled upon it in an obscure chapter, and have been unable to find
it. But it refers to how the hebrew people would be held accountable (faulty
memory) or something for the sacrifice of innocent animals required for
their cleansing. So I am loth to pass judgement, as god seems to care about
the welfare of animals too.
meee
--
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dimg2...@news2.newsguy.com...
> Question (before I eliminate the cross-posts): Are there
> any "religious" newsgroups for intelligent, educated adults
> with the ability to actually THINK? I heard those same
> asinine platitudes in my Methodist Sunday School (more years
> ago than most of you can count). I thought they were a load
> of unproven crap then, and a lifetime of practical
> experience has only confirmed my initial impression (ad
> nauseum and ad infinitum).
>
unfortunately i don't think so...in fact your sunday school teachers (or
their clones) are probably inhabiting one somewhere...a good idea not to go
there. The minute you put 'religion' in the subject header you get invaded
by rabid fundamentalist self professed christians
meee
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dimen...@news2.newsguy.com...
too true (and for that, i still enjoy 'puck' <guilty smile>) Kipling was
nothing like a british raj, or no-one would still be reading him...in fact i
rather think he wished he was a native!! Or an elephant or something...:^)
meee
"Dore" <dorewil...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:yiB3f.15308$Iq3.13508@trndny01...
>
> "RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:bMm3f.136125$qY1....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > What souls are you talking about. The body is the soul itself, not the
> > spirit.
>
> Your soul is what gives you life.
>
> Gen 2:7
> 7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into
> his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
> KJV
>
> Animals have life, thus they have souls.
> --
> Dore
>
> www.dorewilliamson.com
>
>
And when god cause balaam's donkey to speak, it said what a donkey would say
at the moment....the scripture says god "opened the donkey's mouth" it
doesn't say he "put his own words into the donkey's mouth" or "spoke through
the donkey" it seems (my reading, everyone is open to their own) to say that
the donkey said in human talk what he was thinking in donkey talk....that
makes me think that a) the donkey had something useful to say to the man
riding him that god thought the man needed to hear and b) god seemed to
think the donkeys opinion was valid and worth taking seriously.
meee
"RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
news:7%C3f.426425$5N3.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Animals don't go to heaven whether they are good or bad, gentle or wild.
> Animals prey on one another. The bible says clean animals can be eaten but
> unclean animals
> should not.
Um, and what about Peter's vision re; clean verses unclean? Or do you only
read the OT? And all the times paul went on about 'food for idols not being
unclean??' stop backing up theories with out of context scriptures, it
alienates people more. Don't you guys get it? bible bashing doesn't work.
NO_ONE in this group is going to get 'suddenly convicted' by what you are
saying....What was the Greatest commandment according to Jesus?? Cos you
people sure aren't demonstrating it here.
meee
"RAP" <radio...@att.net> wrote in message
news:DyG3f.427619$5N3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
See Ecclesiastes 3:21 Who knows if the spirit of man rises upwards, and the
spirit of the animal goes down into the earth? NIV which I think may b more
accurate than the KJ as the KJ was written by people sucking up to King
James
Fat Freddy
interesting stuff than this religious nonsense.
Exocat
AND REALLY STUPID SUBJECT HERE!
All you have to do is remove rpca from the list of ng's on the top line
of your "reply to group" post. In OE anyway.
TIA
Gordon & the FF
Bobcat
There are so many riches it's difficult to choose, but possibly my favourite
is the poem, Recessional, with it's immortal refrain that's echoed every
November 11th - "Lest we forget".
http://www.web-books.com/Classics/Poetry/Anthology/Kipling/Recessional.htm
Markwise
meee wrote:
> > Markwise wrote:
> > The problem with this thought is that you're creating the notion that
> > animals have a spirit/soul which they do not and Scripture never says
> > they do. This goes back to Creation, God creates all the plants and
> > animals by His Word. He created mankind specially and different from
> > the animals in that we have a soul.
> >
> > Thus, without a soul to speak of, animals are no more eternal, no more
> > capable of heaven or hell, than plants and rocks and the like.
> >
> > Hope that clarifies.
> >
>
> I will have to agree to disagree with you. I am holding these 'self evident
> truths' to be unsure until i feel that i believe them for myself, as i feel
> it is foolish for someone to believe something because you have been
> instructed to believe it all your life. I believe in other religions or
> cults we refer to it as 'brainwashing'...until then, i do not want to pass
> judgement on these things, or othe'r pov as i'm sure god knows and
> understands where they're coming from and will sort it out with them in his
> own time...as he does. I merely pointed out that there are other less
> commonly quoted verses that might present a different ideology to the one
> first expressed. There is another verse which i don't know the reference
> tooo, i stumbled upon it in an obscure chapter, and have been unable to find
> it. But it refers to how the hebrew people would be held accountable (faulty
> memory) or something for the sacrifice of innocent animals required for
> their cleansing. So I am loth to pass judgement, as god seems to care about
> the welfare of animals too.
Well on a personal level you are certainly entitled and encouraged to
doubt these truths until you believe them on your own. Faith or belief
is a personal thing. However, personal belief or not, that does not
change for instance what the absolute truth is and always has been.
I can't express more clearly to you the clear witness of Scripture that
animals do not have souls. That is the clear distinction here.
Animals have no soul, hence animals have no eternity. All other things
aside these are absolute truths.
Now, we can from that point speak about proper treatment of animals and
speak of whether or not God does care about the welfare of animals.
But it is very important to note the difference between humanity and
animals. Humans are God's special creatures. Animals are a simple
part of creation, nothing more.
I'm all for the free expression of opinions here. But where Scripture
speaks clearly and definitively it there stands as truth. Any opinions
contrary to that are just simply wrong, no ways about it.
Bobcat
(After carefully stripping away all crossposting):
Ah, I love quotations! There always seems to be at least one for every
utterance and every occasion:
"The best argument for Christianity is Christians: their joy, their
certainty, their completeness. But the strongest argument against
Christianity is also Christians--when they are somber and joyless, when they
are self-righteous and smug in complacent consecration, when they are narrow
and repressive, then Christianity dies a thousand deaths."
- Joe Aldrich, author of "Secrets of Wisdom from Mother's Heart", "Lifestyle
Evangelism - Learning to Open Your Life to Those Around You" etc.
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Markwise wrote:
> No, absolute truth implies precisely what the words say. Truth that is
> absolute.
If such a thing exists, I doubt whether you'd recognize it
if you encountered it! (Even "absolute zero" is only
relative.)
> By your means of reasoning then truth is the servant of
> science alone. And quite honestly, I'd be surprised if you're ready to
> admit that there is no truth outside of science.
If you mean there is no "truth" that is not demonstrable,
you're right! Everything else is "theory" or "assumption"
or "unsupported belief" - "faith", in other words. Many
people have "faith" in things whose "truth" cannot be
demonstrated one way or the other. They have a right to
believe whatever they choose, so long as it remains
unamenable to objective proof. (It doesn't say much for
their intelligence, however, if they argue for their "faith"
in the teeth of all evidence that some of their beliefs are
flawed - why did their God give them brains, if not to use
them?)
>
> The Bible is the absolute truth.
Sez who? There are a good many people of other religions
who place equal faith in THEIR "holy" books - and with as
much reason to believe in their "absolute truth". (Namely,
NONE!)
> Say what you want, but facts are
> facts.
True - so why do you persist in ignoring them? I am
sincerely sorry for anyone whose concept of "God" is so very
narrow that scientific discoveries are perceived as threats
to "faith", rather than revelations of His wonders! (He
reveals Himself through SCIENCE, even if those revelations
are not quite what some primitive goatherd invented to
explain perceived phenomena.)
> Science is the servant of God and His Word.
You'll not get an argument from me there, whether you call
it "God" or "Supreme Being" or "Natural Law". Doesn't your
bible state somewhere that "God is Truth"? Science is the
servant of Truth - but it cannot remain so if it allows
narrow-minded, ignorant bigots to dictate what "truth" is,
and to deny it if it contradicts what was previously
believed! "The Bible" (like all sacred writings, of
whatever faith) represents Man's attempts to understand the
universe in which he lives. Science represents his actual
growing KNOWLEDGE of that universe. There are still many
unsolved problems and unanswered questions (how can the
finite fully understand the infinite?) but to deny truth
because it contradicts the superstitious notions of a
primitive culture of nomadic herders is IMO to deny "God"!
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
RAP wrote:
> Animals don't go to heaven whether they are good or bad, gentle or wild.
Then what human in their right mind would want to go to
heaven, either?
> Animals prey on one another.
And humans DON'T?????? Animals only prey upon one another
for food (as your God created them to do). It took that
"higher being" called Man to invent torture and slavery and
war! (I'd prefer life with "animals" any day!)
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Yoj wrote:
> Evelyn, could you please delete the other groups when you respond to a
> message in this thread? As long as it is cross-posted, it is inviting an
> invasion like the one we had a while ago.
>
I might, if I were sure where the posts to which I reply
were coming from. Given the title of the thread, and the
direction in which it has gone, why not just skip it, until
it disappears? (FWIW, I doubt whether the unscientific
bigots to whom I've replied have the requisite know-how to
foment another "techy" invasion.)
meee
"Markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129304318.0...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Look, you've already said this. and although you say i am entitled to my
opinion, it sounds too much like you are trying to talk me and everyone who
believes differently from you around to your point of view. I am not
doubting the truthfulness of the scriptures. i agree with you on that point.
What I am, and probably will continue to question my whole life (and i feel
that is a positive thing) is man's interpretation of the scriptures. After
all, if it IS written by an infinite God, who are we to pin down a
difficult-to-comprehend passage and say 'this is what it says and I am
right" The fact is, there are contadictory passages in scripture, and I feel
that there are things we are NOT meant to understand at certain times. With
questions such as this, maybe it's none of our business and we are not meant
to know yet. I don't feel there is strong enough evidence either way; and I
don't think you are offering enough evidence to convince either me or anyone
else (except for those that already hold your beliefs) that your POV is
right. You have offered us out of context scriptures, and told us what you
have been taught they mean. Then you have told us that what you believ as
truth is truth. To outline my view, I believe the scriptures to be true, and
where they state clearly in context what they mean, that is obviously truth.
but sometimes we interpret things from our own point of view. The Bible was
written for the salvation of humans. As for the animals, I'm not sure. But
it does say, 'the lion will lie down with the lamb, and the little child
will lead them' which seems to me to say that there will be animals in the
afterlife; whether they are the same ones we are priveledged to know here on
earth, it doesn't say either way. So for me, this discussion is open only to
the One who knows what he's talking about.
meee
"Bobcat" <bob_cat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gWQ3f.6405$S43.9...@news20.bellglobal.com...
unfortunately and sadly this is true. and having been both the reciever and
giver of such smug self righteousness, i am loth to tie myself to the name
of 'christian' but that has nothing to do with the teachings, and life of ch
rist.
meee
"Bobcat" <bob_cat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5bO3f.8016$vD4.4...@news20.bellglobal.com...
I can't remember all of it, i'm looking up your link now to refresh my
memory... ahh, very appropriate to current posters!! well said! and i agree,
it is lovely...thanks for that link, now i can read all the ones I havn't
read! That's made my day!
Radiogalaxy
number of obsolete words used in the older version (KJV). But the message is
still the same.
"meee" <efam...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:CbH3f.17456$U51....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
wafflycat
>
>
> Sorry, Helen - I simply see red when these ignorant, uneducated clods
> start parroting their unreasoned platitudes!
>
No apology needed :) I think the idea of such posts is to induce the red
rage to illicit responses!
Cheers, helen s
meee
say worse but I won't). although I didn't start the thread, I got
involved....some things get me angry, and self-righteousness and bible
bashing from church people gets me angry. It's got nothing to do with
anything christ preached, in fact I rather think he would have called us in
the church pharisees, and hung around you lot. Please accept my apology.
RAP
Believe what you believe. But the Bible is an instruction manual for men and
women ,how to live life to the fullest, and in becoming close to God in body
and spirit. I't s up to them to take it seriously or not.
They have their own reward.
The main focus of instructions are for men and women, not animals.
God did not talk to animals, and so with Jesus.
If you want to know more about animals, just go to a nearby bookstore,
library or Petshop. You can even borrow or buy video of them particularly in
the kiddies section about animal stories like Lion King, Bambi,
Balto etc.( These are old versions already and i'm not sure if they got new
ones ).
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
RAP wrote:
When will I learn not to try to engage in a battle of wits
with an unarmed man?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Bobcat
- Or a bout of cat scratch fever!
Annie Wxill
..>
> When will I learn not to try to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed
> man?
>
If you get the urge, maybe you could remove this group from the
crosspostings and leave the debate in the others?
Thanks,
Annie
Bobcat
Let me add that I wasn't implying you were catty. I was thinking of this
newsgroup in general with its ailurophilic contributors and their furry
companions!
Markwise
meee wrote:
> Look, you've already said this. and although you say i am entitled to my
> opinion, it sounds too much like you are trying to talk me and everyone who
> believes differently from you around to your point of view. I am not
> doubting the truthfulness of the scriptures. i agree with you on that point.
> What I am, and probably will continue to question my whole life (and i feel
> that is a positive thing) is man's interpretation of the scriptures. After
> all, if it IS written by an infinite God, who are we to pin down a
> difficult-to-comprehend passage and say 'this is what it says and I am
> right"
Show me the difficult-to-comprehend passages about animals possibly
having souls and we'll go from there.
> The fact is, there are contadictory passages in scripture,
There are no contradictions in Scripture.
> and I feel
> that there are things we are NOT meant to understand at certain times.
I would agree with you in principle on this.
> With
> questions such as this, maybe it's none of our business and we are not meant
> to know yet. I don't feel there is strong enough evidence either way; and I
> don't think you are offering enough evidence to convince either me or anyone
> else (except for those that already hold your beliefs) that your POV is
> right. You have offered us out of context scriptures, and told us what you
> have been taught they mean. Then you have told us that what you believ as
> truth is truth.
Show me where in Scripture it says animals have souls. Show me even
where it may even imply or hint at that. I can quote for you Genesis 1
& 2 where the animals are created by the Word just as the plants, the
stars, the sun & the moon. Mankind is created by God's hand and with
the breath of God. Very plain differences in creation. That's only
the very beginning of Scripture's witness to the fact that humans are
special in God's eyes whereas animals are not. And nothing against
animals, I love the pets I have at home. But fact of the matter is,
they don't have souls. So when one of my pets dies I give a prayer of
thanks to God for the gift of such a wonderful companion during this
life and that's that.
> To outline my view, I believe the scriptures to be true, and
> where they state clearly in context what they mean, that is obviously truth.
> but sometimes we interpret things from our own point of view. The Bible was
> written for the salvation of humans. As for the animals, I'm not sure. But
> it does say, 'the lion will lie down with the lamb, and the little child
> will lead them' which seems to me to say that there will be animals in the
> afterlife; whether they are the same ones we are priveledged to know here on
> earth, it doesn't say either way. So for me, this discussion is open only to
> the One who knows what he's talking about.
The problem with assuming the possibility that the lion or the lamb in
heaven is the same as the one we knew here on earth is that we are
adding to Scripture what isn't there.
Libertarius
Radiogalaxy wrote:
> The NIV is a revision fron the KJV, using modern English since there are
> number of obsolete words used in the older version (KJV). But the message is
> still the same.
===>And in neither is any reference to animals or humans
going to heaven. -- L.
RAP
Oh I did nor know you are engaging battle of wits with me. To me, you are
just doing some kind of ..
sweet romance and I'm just returning the "FLAVORS"....the same thing a man
do when a woman spreads
out her legs.
Linda Terrell
> The problem with this thought is that you're creating the notion that
> animals have a spirit/soul which they do not and Scripture never says
> they do. This goes back to Creation, God creates all the plants and
> animals by His Word. He created mankind specially and different from
> the animals in that we have a soul.
>
> Thus, without a soul to speak of, animals are no more eternal, no more
> capable of heaven or hell, than plants and rocks and the like.
>
> Hope that clarifies.
I don't believe in your God or your Book.
The Judeo-Christian God is a jealous thug.
LT
Bobcat
"Linda Terrell" <lin...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:lindat5-3870EA...@news1.west.earthlink.net...
Have you noticed that the smuggest, most vehement and sometimes most hostile
posts in this thread haven't come from the newsgroup with the words "pets"
and "cats" in its title, but crossposted from ones with the words
"religion", Christian" and "Bible"? IMO there's something sad about that.
Bobcat
Linda, I didn't mean you'd crossposted from one of those
"religion/Christian/Bible groups. I know you're an ailurophile who frequents
this one, rec.pets.cats.anecdotes (as well as other cat NGs), and probably
posted to here. I dropped my little comment into the mix right after yours,
but I didn't mean to imply it referred directly to you. It didn't, and sorry
if I gave that impression.
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Linda Terrell wrote:
Only in some of the more narrow-minded denominations! Who
was it who said "God created Man in his own image, so man
returned the compliment"? (Mark Twain, probably - he had a
way with words.)
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
Bobcat wrote:
>
> Have you noticed that the smuggest, most vehement and sometimes most hostile
> posts in this thread haven't come from the newsgroup with the words "pets"
> and "cats" in its title, but crossposted from ones with the words
> "religion", Christian" and "Bible"? IMO there's something sad about that.
Very sad! Perhaps we should introduce a few cats into their
lives?
>
>
Bobcat
At least one source says you're correct - it was Mark Twain. Apparently his
exact words were "God created man in his own image, and man, being a
gentleman, returned the compliment." But others credit the 18th century
German scientist and satirist Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, who put it
slightly differently: "God created Man in His image, says the Bible;
philosophers reverse the process: they create God in theirs."
meee
look, i've said i don't want to discuss this with you any more. If i do
discuss it with anyone, it will be with someone i know and trust, not an
anonymous self-confident person on usenet who can't take a hint. goodbye.
meee
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:diuca...@news4.newsguy.com...
they probably have cats but don't appreciate them...poor cats.
meee
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:diuc8...@news4.newsguy.com...
bless mark twain! I've met cats, and christians, and the cats are more
christian than the human version. i believe in god because of animals, not
people (except maybe my kids)
Monique Y. Mudama
themselves. At first I meant to post this to all the groups, but then
I decided I shouldn't drag this conversation back. So hopefully I
stopped it in time, and this will only go to rpca. But I still felt
the need to say it.
On 2005-10-15, Markwise penned:
>
> Show me where in Scripture it says animals have souls. Show me even
> where it may even imply or hint at that. I can quote for you
> Genesis 1 & 2 where the animals are created by the Word just as the
> plants, the stars, the sun & the moon. Mankind is created by God's
> hand and with the breath of God. Very plain differences in
> creation.
Show me where it says animals don't have souls.
You're saying that because there's a difference in the method of
creation, one creation method must involve a soul for all beings, and
teh other creation method must not. Silly you. You're suggesting
that God is not omnipotent. Otherwise he could do whatever the hell
he wanted, including giving animals souls with a word.
As we say in gaming lingo, Pwnt.
> The problem with assuming the possibility that the lion or the lamb
> in heaven is the same as the one we knew here on earth is that we
> are adding to Scripture what isn't there.
Right. And where the word "spoon" is used, what he really means is
the concept of nuclear fusion.
Stretch much?
--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully
pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca
cybercat
"Monique Y. Mudama" <sp...@bounceswoosh.org> wrote in message
news:slrndl85e...@home.bounceswoosh.org...
> I'm going to cheat and respond to someone who isn't here to defend
> themselves.
??? Monique, why bother if you are not reaching the person
who posted it? When the hell did you get so damned easy
to repress?
Ugh.
Monique Y. Mudama
>
> "Monique Y. Mudama" <sp...@bounceswoosh.org> wrote in message
> news:slrndl85e...@home.bounceswoosh.org...
>> I'm going to cheat and respond to someone who isn't here to defend
>> themselves.
>
> ??? Monique, why bother if you are not reaching the person who
> posted it? When the hell did you get so damned easy to repress?
>
> Ugh.
>
Obviously because I thought I was being moderately witty, but also
didn't think that Markwise guy would appreciate it. Maybe some of the
folks here would.
cybercat
> On 2005-10-17, cybercat penned:
>>
>> "Monique Y. Mudama" <sp...@bounceswoosh.org> wrote in message
>> news:slrndl85e...@home.bounceswoosh.org...
>>> I'm going to cheat and respond to someone who isn't here to defend
>>> themselves.
>>
>> ??? Monique, why bother if you are not reaching the person who
>> posted it? When the hell did you get so damned easy to repress?
>>
>> Ugh.
>>
>
> Obviously because I thought I was being moderately witty, but also
> didn't think that Markwise guy would appreciate it. Maybe some of the
> folks here would.
>
*shrug*
Maybe.
meee
cronies refused to answer one of my posts...i don't know if you've read this
bit, but there's a bit in the bible where God makes a donkey talk...and it
seems to me that it was the donkey talking, god just gave it 'human speech'
for a while....funnily enough they ignored that one....maybe that part of
the bible isn't in their religion or something....selective hearing i
think....just don't take people like that seriously, feel sorry for them
instead for not being able to think for themselves.
--
There are many intelligent species in the Universe. They are all owned by
cats.
Anonymous
One cat just leads to another. -Ernest Hemingway
"Monique Y. Mudama" <sp...@bounceswoosh.org> wrote in message
news:slrndl85e...@home.bounceswoosh.org...
Monique Y. Mudama
> Don't worry Monique, i read it...and funnily enough, markwise and
> his cronies refused to answer one of my posts...i don't know if
> you've read this bit, but there's a bit in the bible where God makes
> a donkey talk...and it seems to me that it was the donkey talking,
> god just gave it 'human speech' for a while....funnily enough they
> ignored that one....maybe that part of the bible isn't in their
> religion or something....selective hearing i think....just don't
> take people like that seriously, feel sorry for them instead for not
> being able to think for themselves.
I did read your post =)
Honestly, I know next to nothing about the bible, and I'm not
Christian, so whether or not a Christian believes that animals have
souls doesn't matter to me. But if someone's going to spout off like
those guys did, they should at least try to keep their arguments
internally consistent!
The truly frightening part is that they surely believe that their
arguments are completely logical and valid.
meee
"Monique Y. Mudama" <sp...@bounceswoosh.org> wrote in message
news:slrndl8kq...@home.bounceswoosh.org...
The sad thing is, and the thing that speaks most about their lack of
self-awareness is that in all their blather they missed the whole point of
jesus christ...which had nothing to do with stuffing quoted out of context
bible verses down the throats of people who really couldn't give a stuff and
wish they'd crawl back under the rock they came from. I do read the bible,
and thankfully this group is more gracious than those from my side of the
fence, or I'd have been kicked off for just belonging to the same (or
distantly related) belief system as they do. They've missed the point
somehow...
Linda Terrell
> >
> > Have you noticed that the smuggest, most vehement and sometimes most
> > hostile posts in this thread haven't come from the newsgroup with the
> > words "pets" and "cats" in its title, but crossposted from ones with the
> > words "religion", Christian" and "Bible"? IMO there's something sad about
> > that.
>
> Linda, I didn't mean you'd crossposted from one of those
> "religion/Christian/Bible groups. I know you're an ailurophile who frequents
> this one, rec.pets.cats.anecdotes (as well as other cat NGs), and probably
> posted to here. I dropped my little comment into the mix right after yours,
> but I didn't mean to imply it referred directly to you. It didn't, and sorry
> if I gave that impression.
I kinda thought that. thanx
LT
Singh
with his wealth is "not equal even to an ant, who in its mind never forgets
God." My husband and I, and many other Sikhs we know, take this verse pretty
literally, believing that the animals know deep in their guts that they have
a creator and do not forget Him/Her; and that, having traded instinct for
reason, humans are more capable of forgetting God than the animals. Since we
consider the rememberance of God and devotion to His/Her name to be the
highest of worship, we think sometimes that the animals have one over us,
and that we humans must work harder to realize the Divine in our lives.
But this is our belief; it doesn't represent all of Sikhism any more than it
represents all who post on this board. But I will say this. I wish I knew of
this board when I had to put my beloved Fritzie to sleep two years ago. The
rational side of me knew it was the best for him, that it would have been
wrong to make him suffer out of human selfishness. It didn't keep me from
having months worth of nightmares, reliving the sadness that wanted to choke
me. I had to start a Christmas job the very day and couldn't take off. It
was at a Bath & Body Works where you have to be happy, or look it, OR ELSE.
Try faking Christmas cheer when you've just had to euthanize a cherished
family member. It's not easy, believe me. As I've said on a previous thread,
if my words of comfort and belief in an afterlife for our beloved creatures
can spare someone a day of heartache or a mind-wrenching nightmare, then
I've done my Scout's Duty.
Besides, I cannot imagine heaven without the animals. How many children have
passed on without knowing the love and play of a pet, the feeling of being
on a horse, seeing the majesty of elephants and tigers! It would not be
heaven, without all the beauty God created, including the animals.
Blessed be,
Baha
James <ar...@surfbest.net> wrote in message
news:tgsqk1dvb3l6vop6n...@4ax.com...
> >Charlie Wilkes <charlie...@users.easynews.com>
>
> >Re: Do animals go to heaven?
>
> >Over here in rec.pets.cats.anecdotes, we like to console each other
> >with comforting stories about a Rainbow Bridge that our pets cross
> >over after death, where they wait for us to die so they can join us in
> >heaven.
> >
> >Is it true, or are we just kidding ourselves?
> >
> >Charlie
>
> Charlie,
>
> Looks like it is kidding time. The Bible shows us that unreasoning
> animals were made to die, not live forever. 2 Pe 2:12,
>
> "But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are
> like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and
> destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish." (NIV)
>
> Also notice Ps 49:20,
>
> "A man who has riches without understanding is like the beasts that
> perish." (NIV)
>
> But did you know that the Bible tells us that not all good people will
> go to Heaven? For example, how could Jesus' statement be true here, if
> ALL the good ones went to Heaven? Mt 5:5,
>
> "Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth." (NIV)
>
> More on what the Bible has to say on this subject if you are
> interested.
>
>
> Sincerely, James
>
>
>
Bobcat
news:11lbfms...@corp.supernews.com...
Baha, of all the posts to this thread, yours moved me the most with its
honesty, profundity, sincerity and - yes, - poetry. It offers a fresh
perspective on our discussion, and I'm keeping it in a special file where I
can read it again in future. Thank you so much for writing it.
meee
--
There are many intelligent species in the Universe. They are all owned by
cats.
Anonymous
One cat just leads to another. -Ernest Hemingway
"Singh" <liz...@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:11lbfms...@corp.supernews.com...