[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Christchan is back up after maintenance! The flood errors should now be resolved. Thank you to everyone who submitted a bug report!

File: 57e00c7bfb6dac2⋯.jpg (50.16 KB, 500x365, 100:73, 2.jpg)

2c4e91 No.592893

Serious question for people more knowledgeable of scripture than me.

What does the Bible say about maximising the welfare of animals? I have a guilty conscience when I see an animal express what looks like agony after being severely injured, but as far as I'm aware they have no soul so Christians have no duty to them one way or the other.

So would there be any context where God wants a human to suffer for the benefit of animals? Is what would be the worst possible torture when applied to humans encouraged when instead applied to animals, provided that it adds to the welfare of one human?

1ccc69 No.592900

File: b411ab086804e17⋯.jpg (19.75 KB, 500x332, 125:83, animal2.jpg)

>>592893

> I have a guilty conscience when I see an animal express what looks like agony after being severely injured

It is agony.

They have a complex enough brain to recognise pain.

In fact, dogs and cat neurologically see us as family(as humans for dogs, as big felines for cats), and dogs's brains pleasure and happiness centers light up when they see their owners.

And almost all domestic animals have reasonably complex brains, so…

> but as far as I'm aware they have no soul

They don't have imago dei, aka reason.

They still have emotions, intelligence, etc.

>So would there be any context where God wants a human to suffer for the benefit of animals?

I assume like that lady that got hacked to death for defending lowland gorillas.

>Is what would be the worst possible torture when applied to humans encouraged when instead applied to animals, provided that it adds to the welfare of one human?

No.

It would be mostly wanton cruelty, unless torturing that animal gives us cures for all cancers forever, or some other super-positive thing, and even then, it'd be done with a heavy heart, and with a confession to your priest afterwards, canonically speaking.

>What does the Bible say about maximising the welfare of animals?

Stewards of the earth and all that.

Besides, animal abuse falls under cruelty towards another living being, so it's still a pretty big sin.

And given all the Good Sheperd symbolism in the NT, as the one who takes care of his flock, goes after them, whom the sheep instinctively recognise as their caretaker, shows that a compassionate animal-rearer is a prototype of the same providence God shows towards us.

So, in a nutshell, hurting animals a no-no.


72e2fe No.592901

>>592893

I feels like this is a b8 thread, but these passages should answer the question:

>Deuteronomy 25:4

(4)  "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn."

>Numbers 22:26-33

(26)  "And the angel of the LORD went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left.

(27)  And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she fell down under Balaam: and Balaam's anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with a staff.

(28)  And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?

(29)  And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee.

(30)  And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay.

(31)  Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face.

(32)  And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is perverse before me:

(33)  And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive."

>Proverbs 12:10

(10)  "A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel."


2c4e91 No.592909

>>592901

Not intended to be bait. To clarify: the question is about Christian duties to animals, not the meat industry or any heated topic loosely related to Christianity.


887b01 No.592910

>as far as I'm aware they have no soul

I'm not exactly versed in the bible either, but what part of the bible that says animals don't have souls?

I remember the church that I went to believed that they do and have seen arguments online that leans towards it (such as this link here). https://www.thoughtco.com/do-animals-have-souls-701974

While seemingly to vague for a straight answer in the bible, is there an explicit problem if animals have souls too (i.e. Blasphemous in some way?), or simply we just don't know since the bible doesn't explicitly say so?


6faedb No.592919

>>592900

>it's still a pretty big sin

Hurting an animal is not a sin and nothing in your post proves it is.


7289d9 No.592922

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

God doesn't care about animals at all.


6befb0 No.592932

>>592919

>>592922

lol, the eternal prot


4ef1b4 No.592933

>>592922

Naaah. Animals were made to serve humans, as food, companions, labourers. God feeds the sparrow, he obviously cares for animals. It's just that we as humans and in the image of God are cared for a thousandfold more.

>>592900

>Besides, animal abuse falls under cruelty towards another living being, so it's still a pretty big sin.

>So, in a nutshell, hurting animals a no-no.

I agree that it's harmful to our spirits to abuse and torture animals. Furthermore, a person who hurts any creature for their own gratification is probably quite wicked, as anon posted out of Proverbs.

But to say it's a sin to hurt an animal, however, is a slippery slope to (((vegetarianism))). If it's a sin to hurt, say, a fish, then you imply that Jesus sinned.


6faedb No.592934

>>592932

Was God commanding Peter to sin in acts when he told him to kill and eat?


992f90 No.593043

>>592933

>>592934

One could make a distinction between killing fish to have a healthy diet in the 1st century, and torturing animals for pleasure.

All it suggests is animal suffering is morally justified in some contexts.


623e2f No.593061

>>592919

Hurting an animal just for the heck of it is indeed a mortal sin.


6d5019 No.593066

>>592893

Just because animals may or may not have a soul doesn't mean they have no nervous sytem. They do feel the pain and the "internal agony" when severely injured.

Don't forget that animals are God's Creation, too, and every single one is precious - even if we don't see it or feel utter disgust. That is to say, of course we're the ones with the authority over animals so to speak - that doesn't mean in any way that we can hurt them or even torture - that's mortal sin.

If you love Creation, you have to love all of it, because God loves all of it. And regarding a human suffering for an animal .. there are enough cases of people risking their health and well-being in order to help (an) animal(s). Many of that is more in direction of militant veganism people (aka Peta and the like), but that doesn't make their efforts worth less - just their motives are (partially pretty) questionable. So no, you don't have to go and risk your live in Africa to save the silverbacks - although that might be a pretty good idea … - but when you see someone kicking a cat or a dog (and other, prolly worse things) you have a duty (morally but also by law) to at least call the police (and go in between to stop that if you feel like it).


1ccc69 No.593073

>>592933

>But to say it's a sin to hurt an animal, however, is a slippery slope to (((vegetarianism))). If it's a sin to hurt, say, a fish, then you imply that Jesus sinned.

Hurt as in "hurt without reason".

Killing a sheep for consumption is ok.

One should try to make it quick and painless for the animal, though.

Regarding vegetarianism, patristic evidence shows it to be a popular choice among early christians.

Of course, it was considered a personal choice, and certainly not the preachy bs modern vegans make it as.

And soyboy memes aside, one should only partake of meat infrequently.

It's healthier, and too much meat greatly increases the risk of heart attack, cervical cancer, and other ailments.

Don't shun the practice just because modern liberals have ruined it for many.


b659ba No.593075

>>592893

hurting an animal is sin itself


4ef1b4 No.593081

>>593043

>>593073

Of course it's wrong to take pleasure in the suffering of any creature. I'm just sick of seeing edgy /b/tards say stuff like "I can watch gore all day, but seeing an animal hurt?"

Or the secular-pagan animal worship rife in the public schools in my country.


0828a8 No.593088

>>593073

>It's healthier

No.


bf8017 No.593119

>>592909

we were vegans before the fall and flood.

>And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

- Genesis 1:29 (kjv)

>fall then flood

Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

- Genesis 9:3


172d3e No.593124

>>593073

More importantly, vegetarianism is less decadent.


767e3d No.593134

>>593073

Not sure it its healthier, especially considering that we were made in a world where you can hunt all year round but only eat fresh fruit and so forth in the summer.


695226 No.593141

>>593119

Note that He permits Adam and Eve to eat herbs and fruit. He does not forbid them to eat flesh. Also in Gen. 3:21 God makes them coats of animal skins. What happened to the meat from the animals? We don't know.


b55371 No.593144

!!!!! Where did this utter nonsense of "lol you can't love animals bro they're tools >:^)" begin? Cold, unfeeling LARPers?

We are stewards of the Earth so it does not even matter if they do not have souls. We are to treat them with the utmost respect and love. And as others have said, they CAN feel pain and the best of them (dogs and others) DO love. As to whether or not they have souls, I am not sure. It is a possibility that they will be in heaven though (dogs for example). Why else would you be able to get your pet baptized?


b55371 No.593145

Also the best video I've seen on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDI0vn83Y-g


767e3d No.593149

>>593144

Who baptizes pets?


548fb2 No.593173

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04542a.htm

>animals are good

Genesis 1:25

>everyone has a conscience, the word of god written on their hearts

Romans 2:15

>all creation worships god

Revelation 5:13

>>593145

I saw a different video on pets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-usPFEUhqow


be62a9 No.593184

File: 0b032e0f831fb88⋯.jpg (104.36 KB, 640x675, 128:135, ginger-kids-cartman-is-a-d….jpg)

>>592893

>as far as I'm aware they have no soul so Christians have no duty to them one way or the other.

WOAH, WOAH, WOAH, we'll be stopping right there. Gingers have no souls, but we have just as much responsibility to them as to any other men.

But srsly, we DO have a responsibility to animals, to plants, to all of God's creation:

We are God's stewards over all this earth

… which is why I am so blown away that there ISN'T a Christian Green movement to counteract the stupidity of the Gaia-worshipping greenies that dominate environmental issues today. But, I guess most Christians have adopted the meme that "dominion" means we can do whatever the hell we like, to which I would point them to Luke 12:42-46 for guidance.

>What does the Bible say about maximising the welfare of animals?

<Then God said, ""Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." Gen 1:26

< And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth." Gen 1:28

<The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. Gen 2:15

<"The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me. Lev 25:23

<'''Then the Lord opened the donkey’s mouth, and it said to Balaam, "What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times? … Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?" Num 22 excerpts

That's all I can think of atm.

I don't think this is then justification to regard animals as human equivalents. They're not, but this doesn't mean we get to kick the cat. It's a well-known fact that kids that torture animals grow up to be psychopaths and CEOs, so the cruelty we inflict on the smallest, weakest amongst us reflects on the state of our souls, and, I think, the earth and all in it will testify against those who are wilfully cruel at the end of things. That said, Balaam rode a donkey, as did Christ, and Oxen were biblically expected to grind grain, so animals would work, and animals would die for purposes of our consumption and offerings to the Lord. So, I also don't think veganism is an automatic inference from God's commands to us.

STILL, I will protest against cruel treatment of animals, against "inhumane" caging and dosing with hormones and all the cruelty the food industry insists upon for lower prices because I do not think this is reflective of our stewardship responsibilities nor of our inherent "humanity". But then, the Lord regularly called out bosses, kings and others who were bad to their underlings. And I do regard the animal kingdom as our charges, in the older sense of that word.


1ccc69 No.593234

>>593088

>>593134

It IS healthier to cut down on meat.

Vegans going full retard about it run in other problems(anemia, vitamin deficiency, etc.)


1ccc69 No.593236

>>593184

>which is why I am so blown away that there ISN'T a Christian Green movement

Actually, most of the big churches are on board.

The catholics are big about it in recent years, Patriarch Bartholomew has always been an enviromentalist, the armenians and ethiopian love planting forests, the World Council of Churches is pro-environmentalist, too.

We just aren't united about it, and less loud and annoying than new age fags, for good and for worse.


9dc7ba No.593251

>>593236

Environmentalist or conservationist?


2b9ba5 No.593260

>>593234

>It IS healthier to cut down on meat

You keep saying it but you haven't brought any proof yet


1ccc69 No.593277


139570 No.593280

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>593234

>it is healthier to cut down on meat

only if your meat sources are sausage, pizza, hot dogs, ham, etc…processed shit.


2b9ba5 No.593287

>>593277

>opinion pieces

>(((UN))) agency

I was talking about peer reviewed papers


1ccc69 No.593335


2b9ba5 No.593384

>>593335

Reading the conclusions and not just the numbers it sounds like it's not as clear-cut as you claim




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir ]