03 Oct 05
2 edits
Originally posted by HalitoseYou may have noticed that I haven't posted much in a while. My outside commitments have constrained my activity here to short rants. In light of this, I try to make them pointed and brief. This may cause me to employ an extra dose of hyperbole or an added pinch of mysticism (a habit of the clergy that I usually scorn).
???
*Cough!*
Tel?
Whats going on here?
My post was not intended to insult anyone, but rather to relate my contempt for the extent of anthropocentrism in xianty. Even taking the theme of Man's fallen nature into account, there is a much deeper and broader theme of Man's unique and supreme value in nature. Man in the xian view really sits closer to God than to the animals (Humans are distinct from animals from the Biblical perspective). Consider that God chooses to slaughter nearly all but the necessary fractions of "unclean" animals (and only an insignificant fewer of the "clean" ) in retribution for human behavior. We are always the centerpiece of the great cosmic story of birth/fall/redemption. It does not surprise me that a man-made religion would make the well-being of humans the primary focus and chief concern of the omnimax creator. According to many xians, our ultimate purpose was to have perfect fellowship with this being. Supreme arrogance in my opinion.
A reasonable question in response to the OP might be, "Why would animals not go to heaven? If, contrary to the prevailing theme in the Bible, humans are infinitely less worthy than God, then certainly, in comparison to God, other creatures are no less worthy. Besides, humans are the ones that screw up all the time. Animals haven't done anything wrong. From this argument, animals deserve heaven even more than humans."
03 Oct 05
2 edits
Originally posted by telerionAh. Gotcha. For a moment I thought you had blown a fuse and changed sides. 😛
You may have noticed that I haven't posted much in a while. My outside commitments have constrained my activity here to short rants. In light of this, I try to make them pointed and brief. This may cause me to employ an extra dose of hyperbole or an added pinch of mysticism (a habit of the clergy that I usually scorn).
My post was not intended to i ...[text shortened]... ven't done anything wrong. From this argument, animals deserve heaven even more than humans."
I personally don't take such an extreme view of anthropocentrism as you stated. I believe mankind was meant to be stewards of the earth; beings adored by the animal kingdom, with the responsibility of caring for our planet. I'm a big animal/nature lover myself. I used to have three Rottweilers until my other commitments took up all my time.
When it comes to comparing humans to animals, I do think there are intrinsic differences. Which would you rather save from your burning house? The family dog, or your 2 year old baby? Mankind is created in the image of God; this does not neccissarily mean the physical image, but we do have the ability to reason, talk, love, laugh. Abstract thought and that infamous free will are not hiding to far behind.
From a personal perspective, I found many joys in life through animals, and therefore (not the only reason though) I think there are animals in heaven.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
04 Oct 05
Originally posted by HalitoseIsa 65:17-25
From a personal perspective, I found many joys in life through animals, and therefore (not the only reason though) I think there are animals in heaven.
17 "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered or come to mind...........Text shortened.......The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's food. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain," says the LORD.
(NKJ)
Yes, there will be animals, but not resurrected animals...I don't think.
🙂
04 Oct 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWhat a remarkable thought! Yes, I think that basically takes care of things.
Well, I've thought it over some, and I think that an even more powerful God could have made that God. What do you think?
I suggest we put the old cosmological argument to rest.
Everything that exists has a cause.
The universe exists.
The universe has a cause.
That cause is God.
God exists.
God has a cause.
That cause is a higher God.
Brilliant.
04 Oct 05
Originally posted by checkbaiterI can't believe it. Are you actually going against a traditional Christian view that is held by the church? 😲
Isa 65:17-25
17 "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered or come to mind...........Text shortened.......The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's food. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain," says the LORD.
(NKJ)
Yes, there will be animals, but not resurrected animals...I don't think.
🙂
04 Oct 05
Originally posted by telerionThat's that. Let's close this forum.
What a remarkable thought! Yes, I think that basically takes care of things.
I suggest we put the old cosmological argument to rest.
Everything that exists has a cause.
The universe exists.
The universe has a cause.
That cause is God.
God exists.
God has a cause.
That cause is a higher God.
Brilliant.
Wait a minute. There's one last detail to resolve. What is the cause of the higher God?
04 Oct 05
Originally posted by bbarrNo no no! You only posited that a more powerful God created God. You didn't speak to that God's creator, however. It was an open question, and I posited an answer to it.
I think you're recycling my material. I posited the same explanation on the previous page. Get your own bit, jerkwad!
04 Oct 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesOh excellent catch! And the cosmic question turns again . . .
That's that. Let's close this forum.
Wait a minute. There's one last detail to resolve. What is the cause of the higher God?
Hmm . . . I can't really say just now, but I suspect the answer won't be quite as simple as the last one.