Animals in Heaven

[posthuman]

in hope

21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

"in hope that the creation itself will .. obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God"

there it is: the creation itself was subjected to bondage to decay in the hope that it will receive the glory of salvation through the mercy of God, the very same hope which is our own faith.

is this not speaking of the redemption of the earth and all her creatures? what does it mean for an ocelot to obtain the freedom of the glory of salvation?
heartless, soulless, mindless, terminal annihilation as their hope doesn't seem like a very good interpretive fit to me.

 

[posthuman]

So to answer the question on whether there are animals in heaven, it is possible but the scriptures definitively reveal that the serpents won't be.

i don't see how it follows from the verses you put that serpents / adders / asps / snakes have no future hope . . ?
which verse excludes them?

 

[posthuman]

God didn't create us imperfect. Who we are as God intended is natural to us. What is unnatural to us is sin and death.

why is it then that a child needs to be taught to do what is right, but does not need any instruction before they do what is wrong?

 

[Diakonos]

I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them
that they may see that they themselves are but beasts.
(Ecclesiastes 3:18)

I'm sorry you don't agree. But you obviously haven't payed much attention if you missed the theme of Solomon's writing of Ecclesiastes:

-John D. Barry, Faithlife Study Bible, Ecclesiastes


-David S. Dockery, Holman Bible Commentary, pg 244


-R.T. Kendall, Understanding Theology Vol II, pg 114



The Scripture and the Scholarship is against your idea of Solomon's purpose here

 

[EmethAlethia]

Does anyone think there are animals in Heaven? Jesus comes back on a white horse so I think there is....

According to scripture:

"The lion will lay down with the lamb".

If there are no lions and there are no lambs in heaven then the bible is wrong.​

 

[Diakonos]

read the verse immediately preceding this one. Ecclesiastes 3:17. is he speaking in a godless paradigm? read verse 11. verse 14. is he speaking about a worldview with no God?

what you are repeating is a very superficial gloss of Ecclesiastes commonly used an an excuse to dismiss rather than to deal with the things written in it.

Verse 16 is the beginning of that idea in the passage.....indicating for us another instance of Solomon returning to his theme: 'Under the sun"

 

[posthuman]

I'm sorry you don't agree. But you obviously haven't payed much attention if you missed the theme of Solomon's writing of Ecclesiastes:
View attachment 215652
-John D. Barry, Faithlife Study Bible, Ecclesiastes

View attachment 215653
-David S. Dockery, Holman Bible Commentary, pg 244

View attachment 215654
-R.T. Kendall, Understanding Theology Vol II, pg 114



The Scripture and the Scholarship is against your idea of Solomon's purpose here

Why are you pointing at what some men says, and at their authority, instead of acknowledging what the scriptures themselves say?

 

[posthuman]

Verse 16 is the beginning of that idea in the passage.....indicating for us another instance of Solomon returning to his theme: 'Under the sun"

Look at the verses i called to your attention and see if you can explain them as being written from an atheistic perspective.

 

[Diakonos]

God calls both man and beast alike, 'living souls' - distinct from plants.

Right because In that Genesis-creation context, nefesh indicates a "breathing creature". Plants don't breath. Humans and animals do. That's the only thing we have in common. But the faculty of reason, the "soul" , is clearly only applied to humans in the rest of the Bible.

 

[Diakonos]

Why are you pointing at what some men says, and at their authority, instead of acknowledging what the scriptures themselves say?

Not because they are infallible, but because they have demonstrated (using the Bible) that Solomon's theme is obvious. They are a source of council, because they have a history of Biblical insight.

Gleaning from Biblically seasoned men is wise, according to Solomon:
"The words of wise men are like goads, and the council of scholars are like well-driven nails; they are given by one Shepherd."
-Ecclesiastes 12:11

 

[Diakonos]

It is used of the lower animals 4 times before it is used of man; out of the first 13 times in Genesis, it is used 10 times of the lower animals.

Nephesh in the Bible.

Excerpt:
The word nephesh occurs 754 times in the Hebrew Old Testament.

In the A.V. and R.V. it is translated "soul" 472 times, while in the other
282 places it is represented by forty-four different words or phrases.

 

[Diakonos]

Why would God prohibit beloved pets from joining the human family in heaven?

A. "beloved" is irrelevant, there are many things we love on earth that aren't going to be in heaven.
B. Because the entire creation is under a curse. People, animals, plants, mountains, planets, galaxies....everything.
Of everything that exists her and now...only what is redeemed will live in God's new creation. This current one will be destroyed with fire (2 Pet 3:3-18), and God is going to make a new heavens and earth (Rev 21:1)
“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away.”

He, His angels and His people will dwell there. If God chooses to create new animals in the new creation, He may do that. Personally I think He will #puppiesforeveryone

 

[Diakonos]

i am not very old or very wise, but i have discovered that when it comes to the Bible the "simple" is rarely the correct understanding.

That may be true with the secondary issues, but in the broad scope of Scripture,
"The main things are the plain things" -Alistair Begg

 

[Magenta]

A. "beloved" is irrelevant, there are many things we love on earth that aren't going to be in heaven.
B. Because the entire creation is under a curse. People, animals, plants, mountains, planets, galaxies....everything.
Of everything that exists her and now...only what is redeemed will live in God's new creation. This current one will be destroyed with fire (2 Pet 3:3-18), and God is going to make a new heavens and earth (Rev 21:1)
“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away.”

He, His angels and His people will dwell there. If God chooses to create new animals in the new creation, He may do that. Personally I think He will #puppiesforeveryone

Heaven is God's abode. The whole "our future life in heaven" idea always strikes me as wrong, being amiss according to Scripture, which as you have quoted from Revelation, states that there is to be a new earth, for this present one will be destroyed with fire, and all things made new.

 

[Lightskin]

Right because In that Genesis-creation context, nefesh indicates a "breathing creature". Plants don't breath. Humans and animals do. That's the only thing we have in common. But the faculty of reason, the "soul" , is clearly only applied to humans in the rest of the Bible.

Actually plants do breathe, just not in the same manner as mammals or fish.

 

[tourist]

A. "beloved" is irrelevant, there are many things we love on earth that aren't going to be in heaven.
B. Because the entire creation is under a curse. People, animals, plants, mountains, planets, galaxies....everything.
Of everything that exists her and now...only what is redeemed will live in God's new creation. This current one will be destroyed with fire (2 Pet 3:3-18), and God is going to make a new heavens and earth (Rev 21:1)
“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away.”

He, His angels and His people will dwell there. If God chooses to create new animals in the new creation, He may do that. Personally I think He will #puppiesforeveryone

The thing is, it's not irrelevant for me. I don't care about the new animals in heaven. I want the old animals.

 

[posthuman]

He, His angels and His people will dwell there. If God chooses to create new animals in the new creation, He may do that. Personally I think He will

the creation waits in earnest expectation to share in the glory of the redemption.

this is not speaking of the creation eagerly looking forward to being annihilated and replaced with disconnected copies of itself any more than you have some kind of hope of being extinguished so that some person who is kinda similar to you can live forever in the new heavens and the new earth.

 

[posthuman]

The thing is, it's not irrelevant for me. I don't care about the new animals in heaven. I want the old animals.

yes; i don't look forward to being reunited with a copy of my grandmother.
my actual grandmother.
did Christ come to save my actual grandmother or to destroy her and create a new similar grandmother to dwell with Him?

Thy righteousness is like the great mountains; ​

Thy judgments are a great deep: ​

O LORD, Thou preservest man and beast!​

(Psalm 36:6)​

​

"preservation" is conceptually very different from disposal and substitution. this is a fundamental error in JW theology

 

[posthuman]

Because the entire creation is under a curse. People, animals, plants, mountains, planets, galaxies....everything.

you ought to re-read Genesis 3.

mankind is not cursed. the earth was cursed for Adam's sake

 

[posthuman]

View attachment 215656

as previously mentioned, context.

Genesis chapters 1 & 2.