For a list of all of my disks and ebooks (PDF and Amazon) click here
The Bible Teaches the Immortality of Animals by Elijah D. Buckner 1903
The undercurrent of Bible history shows conclusively that God has never lost sight of His care and love for the lower animals as well as for man. The language of Scripture everywhere teaches compassion and tenderness towards lower animals. The person who fails to recognize this truth fails to recognize the true meaning and force of some of the most tender and instructive parables and passages of revelation. The qualities, the powers, the beauties of lower animals, are declared to have been specifically given them by the Creator.
All receive their appointed food from Him in due season, and are called upon to praise Him. Kindness to them is inculcated, and cruelty reprobated. The destruction of a wicked city was prohibited for the sake of the lives of lower animals.
In the final state of the world the ferocious and the carnivorous animals will change their destructive appetites and passions. They will eat vegetable food, and become gentle, and exhibit kindly dispositions, and all will be restored to primeval peace and happiness.
There is a current of thought from the beginning to the end of the Bible which either expresses or implies that animals share with man immortal life.
But in order to comprehend this mighty truth we must lay aside prejudice and remember the various translations the Bible has undergone and the indifference of theologians on this subject.
St. Paul in his letter to the Romans makes a statement which cannot be interpreted to mean anything else than that animals suffered equally with man in the fall and will be restored through Christ.
St. Paul says: "God having made known unto us the mystery of His will according to His good pleasure, that, in the dispensation of the fulness of time, He might gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are on the earth. . . . For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope, because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body."
Every sentence in the above quotation proves that animals have immortal souls and that they are waiting for the redemption which was made through the atonement of Christ. In the first sentence quoted, when the inspired writer says God will gather together, in one, all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on the earth, He could not possibly limit "all things " to man alone. No man of education would risk his reputation by asserting that man alone was included.
In the next sentence the word creature cannot mean man, for the writer declares that the whole creation groaneth, and not only they, the creatures, but ourselves, man, also.
St. Paul gives us to understand that this suffering of animals shall not be hopeless, but that they shall be delivered together with man from the bondage of corruption. By the word creature is understood all living beings except man. He is not here implied, as St. Paul kept men separate in order to make his argument clear. The creature was made subject to vanity, or sin; not willingly, that is, not from choice, but by reason of Him who subjected the same, that is, through Adam, who by his transgression brought the creature into bondage and subjection to the evils of sin. The word creature is used to point out the lower order of beings in contrast with man. They shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, (that is, from the state of decay which belongs to the matter and not the soul), into the glorious liberty of the children of God; that is, into the same happy condition of freedom and deliverance from the evil, which will be the final privilege of the redeemed.
That the creatures themselves, when this glory is revealed in the sons of God, shall then also be delivered from the bondage of sin, in the final restitution, is plain. The word creature used in the sense of the passage quoted is so very different in its purport from any passage wherein man is referred to that there can be no parallel.
[There is a plain distinction made by using in contrast the words creature and they with man and ourselves. It is a plain observation from nature, as well as revelation, that every inferior creature in the universe travails in pain, and not only they, but we ourselves, we of the human species, groan within ourselves, waiting for the redemption of our bodies from the evils they now labor under. The creatures or lower animals were made subject to vanity or sin "through our offense," and groan under the curse of man's disobedience, but in due time these poor creatures shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption and be restored along with man to happiness. There shall be a "restoration of all things as God hath promised by the mouth of all His holy prophets," when the new heaven and the new earth are to be inhabited.]
John Wesley, in speaking of a general restoration of all animal life, says: "Nothing can be more plainly expressed. Away with vulgar prejudice and let the plain Word of God take its place. They (the animals) shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into glorious liberty, even a measure, according as they are capable, of the liberty of the children of God. A general view of that is given in the eighth chapter of Romans. Then the following blessing shall be given, not only to the children of men, for there is no such restriction in the text, but to every creature according to its capacity: 'God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes, and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying; neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.' What if it should then please the All-Wise and All-Gracious Creator to raise the creatures, which we now call inferior animals, to a higher grade in the scale of creation? What if it should please Him, in the great regeneration, when He makes us 'equal to the angels,' to make them what we are now? Thus in that day all the vanity to which they are now helplessly subject will be abolished; they will suffer no more, either from within or without; the days of their groaning will be ended. In the new earth as well as the new heavens, there will be nothing to give pain, but everything that the wisdom and goodness of God can create to give happiness. As a recompense for what they once suffered while under the 'bondage of corruption,' when God has 'renewed the face of the earth' and their corruptible bodies have put on incorruption, they shall enjoy happiness, suited to their state, without alloy, without interruption, and without end."
Rev. Dr. Edward B. Pusey says that "all nature, having suffered together, shall be restored together. As to us, death is to be the gate of immortality and glory, so in some way to them creation includes all created beings, and all creation must include our nature too, in that one common groan and pang."
The great philosopher and theologian, Bishop Butler, says: "We cannot argue from the reason of the thing that death is the destruction of living agents. Neither can we find anything in the whole analogy of nature to afford us even the slightest presumption that animals ever lose their living powers; much less, if it were possible, that they lose them by death. The immortality of brutes does not necessarily imply that they are endowed with any latent capacities of a rational or moral nature. The economy of the universe might require that there should be immortal creatures with, out any capacities of this kind."
Canon Wilberforce, in an eloquent speech before a meeting of the Anti-Vivisection Society in London said he believed that "these beautiful and useful forms of life, which are sometimes so cruelly tortured, are bound to pass over into another sphere, and that in the great eternal world men and animals should sink or swim together."
Rev. Joseph Cook says: "Do not facts require us to hold that the immortal part in animals having higher than automatic endowments is external to the nervous mechanism in them as well as in man? What are we to say if we find that straightforwardness may lead us to the conclusion that Agassiz was not unjustifiable when he affirmed, in the name of science, that instinct may be immortal, and when he expressed, in his own name, the ardent hope that it might be so. Shall we, too, not hope that this highest conception of paradise may be the true one? Would it not be a diminution of supreme bliss not to have union with God through these, the most majestic of His works below ourselves?"
Agassiz, the greatest scientist we ever have had on this continent, and a man of profound religious convictions, was a firm believer in some future life for lower animals. He says: "Most of the arguments of philosophy in favor of the immortality of man apply equally to the permanency of the immortal principle in other living beings. May I not add that a future life in which man should be deprived of that great source of enjoyment, and intellectual and moral improvement, which result from the contemplation of the harmonies of an organic world, would involve a lamentable loss; and may we not look to a spiritual concert of the combined worlds and all their inhabitants in the presence of their Creator, as the highest conception of paradise? In some incomprehensible way, God Almighty has created these beings, and I cannot doubt of their immortality any more than I doubt of my own."
Rev. Dr. Adam Clark, one among the greatest theologians of his day, makes the following plain and unmistakable statement: "It does not appear that the animal creation are capable of a choice: and it is evident that they are not placed in their present misery, through either their choice or their sin; and if no purpose of God can be ultimately frustrated these creatures must be restored to that state of happiness for which they have been made, and of which they have been deprived through the transgression of man. Had not sin entered into the world, they would have had much greater enjoyments, without pain, excessive labor, and toil, and without death, and all those sufferings which arise from the fall. It is therefore obvious that the gracious purpose of God has not been fulfilled in them; and that, as they have not lost their happiness through their own fault, both the beneficence and justice of God are bound to make them a reparation. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that, as from the present constitution of things they cannot have the happiness designed for them in this state, they must have it in another."
Mrs. Mary Somerville, who was a member of the philosophical societies and academies of science both in England and Germany, and who was noted, the world over, for her scientific knowledge and womanly virtues, when speaking on the subject of death, said: "I shall regret the sky, the sea, with all the changes of their beautiful coloring; the earth, with its verdure and flowers: but far more shall I grieve to leave animals who have followed our steps affectionately for years, without knowing for certain their ultimate fate, though I firmly believe that the living principle is never extinguished. I am sincerely happy to find that I am not the only believer in the immortality of the lower animals."
Miss Frances Power Cobbe, of England, a noted writer, says: "I will venture to say plainly that, so far as appears to me, there is no possible solution of this heart-wearing question save the bold assumption that the existence of animals does not end at death. It is absolutely necessary to postulate a future life for the tortured dog or cat or horse or monkey, if we would escape the unbearable conclusion that a sentient creature, unoffending, nay, incapable of giving offense, has been given by the Creator an existence which, on the whole, has been a curse. That conclusion would be blasphemy. Rejecting it with all the energy of our souls, we find ourselves logically driven to assume the future life of lower animals."
Rev. J. G. Wood, author of "Man and Beast," says: "I feel sure that animals will have the opportunity of developing their latent faculties in the next world, though their free scope has been denied to them in the short time of their existence in the present world. They surpass many human beings in love, unselfishness, generosity, conscience, and self-sacrifice. I claim for them a higher status in creation than is generally attributed to them, and claim they have a future life in which they can be compensated for the suffering which so many of them have to undergo in this world. I am quite sure that most of the cruelties which are perpetrated on animals are due to the habit of considering them as mere machines, without susceptibilities, without reason, and without the capacity of a future."
George T. Angell, President of the American Humane Education Society, and a noted humanitarian, says, "Can there be any doubt that the Almighty, who has given them (animals) one life, has power, if He wishes, to give them another? In God's great universe, comprising as it does perhaps millions of worlds larger than our own, is there not room enough for all?"
Rev. Canon I. T. Carter, a noted English clergyman, says: "We may, moreover, connect with the resurrection of our Lord, the hope for restoration of the entire creation; for the whole world looks forward to that future state. As the whole world of creation around us suffers from the effect of the fall, so in some way they will know a resurrection, and be transformed into a pure, more blessed, more beautiful, state. The lowest creatures are not to be destroyed, but after their manner, according to their kind, will be restored, giving praise and glory to 1 Him who created them.'"
Rev. Robert Eyton makes the following beautiful remarks: "To some of us it would be a great sorrow to think that after this life we are forever entirely and hopelessly separated from that animal world in which many of the deepest of our interests are to be found. It would seem strange to us to think that man should have this world as his home, and should form those wonderful and beautiful relations with many of the animals below him that he now does, and then afterwards, in the new earth, these relations should cease, and that God is then to be looked on henceforth as the God of human beings only, and not of the animal creation. But when we think of animals as being objects of God's creative love, it at once puts us in a new relation towards them and gives us a new hope about their future."
Rev. H. Kirby, of England, says: "We are led to conclude that the suffering, violence, and death which animals have to endure, either at the hand of man or of other animals, did not exist until after the fall of man, and that therefore they are one of the consequences of sin. In other words, the lower animals, who themselves are not guilty of any sin, are nevertheless, undergoing a share of the punishment due to man's sin.
"This would lead us to suppose, from what we know of God's goodness, justice, and equity, that if guilty men are to enjoy the benefits of Christ's Incarnation and Atonement, and are to receive much more than an equivalent for their miseries and suffering, then innocent animals may in all reason look for some recompense for all the ills which they now endure: and since there seems to be but little alleviation of their troubles in the present life, we infer that it may take place in a future and immortal life, of which they are capable from their twofold nature of body and soul."
Dr. John Fulton, of New York, a clergyman of deep piety and bright intellect, recently made the following statement: "This is a redeemed world, with not one suffering creature that has been left out of Christ's all-embracing redemption. And more, I dare believe that St. Paul was right when he looked upon this redeemed world, and seeing how its lower orders are groaning and suffering together with us, even until now, he was inspired to prophesy of a better time, when their redemption and ours shall be perfected together, and the glory that is to be revealed shall surpass all the present suffering. My own belief is that, in some way, which I do not pretend to understand, but in which I can nevertheless believe, the salvation of Christ is broad enough to include and does include the dumb creation."
But one could continue to mention hundreds of noted divines, authors, and scientists, of modern times, as well as ancient writers, who have expressed themselves as believing in the immortality of animals. The doctrine was maintained by a large majority of ancient philosophers, though like the immortality of man, it was of a very uncertain and crude nature.
The old school of Platonists claimed that the souls of all living creatures were a part of the universal soul of the world, and that they were depressed or immerged in the animal body, and when the body died the soul would go to some other living being, sometimes to a man and sometimes to a lower animal.
This doctrine of the transmigration of souls, crude as it was, shows a noble and humane device of the ancients to deter men from indulging in sordid and mean passions. To teach that the souls of men after their separation from the body should pass into the form of such animals as they most resembled in their dispositions, then to endure the horrors and suffering which they were guilty of inflicting, was a wholesome doctrine in those dark days.
If the souls of some of our two-legged animals who have wantonly abused and tortured so many of the quadrupeds should be transmigrated into their forms long enough to realize the regions of hell they have made for them on earth, the angels of mercy would undoubtedly shout, amen!
Menander, a Greek writer, speaking on the subject of transmigration, said to Crato, "When you die you will have a second existence; therefore choose what creature you would like to be, dog, sheep, goat, horse, or man." To which he replied, "Make me anything rather than a man, for he is the only creature that prospers by injustice." Though this was spoken many hundred years ago, yet it is a lamentable fact that it has lost none of its truth.
The doctrine of the immortality of animals was maintained by many Jewish writers and a long list of ancient Christian writers could be mentioned.
Manasseh, a noted Jewish Rabbi, in his discourse on the resurrection, asserts that "dumb animals will have a much happier state than they ever enjoyed here when they with man shall rise again."
And Philo, in his book of future rewards, speaks as follows: "There is no doubt but that hereafter dumb animals will be divested of their ferocity, and become tame and gentle after the manner of other creatures whose dispositions are subdued to harmony and love."
Tertullian, a noted Christian writer, makes the following remarks: "There shall be an end of death, when the devil, its chief master, shall go away into the fire which God has prepared for him and his angels; when the manifestations of the sons of God shall release the world from evil, at present universally subject to it; when the innocence and purity of nature being restored, animals shall live in harmony with each other, and infants shall play without harm with animals once ferocious; when the Father shall have subdued His enemies to His Son and put all things in subjection under His feet."
The undercurrent of Bible history shows conclusively that God has never lost sight of His care and love for the lower animals as well as for man. The language of Scripture everywhere teaches compassion and tenderness towards lower animals. The person who fails to recognize this truth fails to recognize the true meaning and force of some of the most tender and instructive parables and passages of revelation. The qualities, the powers, the beauties of lower animals, are declared to have been specifically given them by the Creator.
All receive their appointed food from Him in due season, and are called upon to praise Him. Kindness to them is inculcated, and cruelty reprobated. The destruction of a wicked city was prohibited for the sake of the lives of lower animals.
In the final state of the world the ferocious and the carnivorous animals will change their destructive appetites and passions. They will eat vegetable food, and become gentle, and exhibit kindly dispositions, and all will be restored to primeval peace and happiness.
There is a current of thought from the beginning to the end of the Bible which either expresses or implies that animals share with man immortal life.
But in order to comprehend this mighty truth we must lay aside prejudice and remember the various translations the Bible has undergone and the indifference of theologians on this subject.
St. Paul in his letter to the Romans makes a statement which cannot be interpreted to mean anything else than that animals suffered equally with man in the fall and will be restored through Christ.
St. Paul says: "God having made known unto us the mystery of His will according to His good pleasure, that, in the dispensation of the fulness of time, He might gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are on the earth. . . . For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope, because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body."
Every sentence in the above quotation proves that animals have immortal souls and that they are waiting for the redemption which was made through the atonement of Christ. In the first sentence quoted, when the inspired writer says God will gather together, in one, all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on the earth, He could not possibly limit "all things " to man alone. No man of education would risk his reputation by asserting that man alone was included.
In the next sentence the word creature cannot mean man, for the writer declares that the whole creation groaneth, and not only they, the creatures, but ourselves, man, also.
St. Paul gives us to understand that this suffering of animals shall not be hopeless, but that they shall be delivered together with man from the bondage of corruption. By the word creature is understood all living beings except man. He is not here implied, as St. Paul kept men separate in order to make his argument clear. The creature was made subject to vanity, or sin; not willingly, that is, not from choice, but by reason of Him who subjected the same, that is, through Adam, who by his transgression brought the creature into bondage and subjection to the evils of sin. The word creature is used to point out the lower order of beings in contrast with man. They shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, (that is, from the state of decay which belongs to the matter and not the soul), into the glorious liberty of the children of God; that is, into the same happy condition of freedom and deliverance from the evil, which will be the final privilege of the redeemed.
That the creatures themselves, when this glory is revealed in the sons of God, shall then also be delivered from the bondage of sin, in the final restitution, is plain. The word creature used in the sense of the passage quoted is so very different in its purport from any passage wherein man is referred to that there can be no parallel.
[There is a plain distinction made by using in contrast the words creature and they with man and ourselves. It is a plain observation from nature, as well as revelation, that every inferior creature in the universe travails in pain, and not only they, but we ourselves, we of the human species, groan within ourselves, waiting for the redemption of our bodies from the evils they now labor under. The creatures or lower animals were made subject to vanity or sin "through our offense," and groan under the curse of man's disobedience, but in due time these poor creatures shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption and be restored along with man to happiness. There shall be a "restoration of all things as God hath promised by the mouth of all His holy prophets," when the new heaven and the new earth are to be inhabited.]
John Wesley, in speaking of a general restoration of all animal life, says: "Nothing can be more plainly expressed. Away with vulgar prejudice and let the plain Word of God take its place. They (the animals) shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into glorious liberty, even a measure, according as they are capable, of the liberty of the children of God. A general view of that is given in the eighth chapter of Romans. Then the following blessing shall be given, not only to the children of men, for there is no such restriction in the text, but to every creature according to its capacity: 'God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes, and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying; neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.' What if it should then please the All-Wise and All-Gracious Creator to raise the creatures, which we now call inferior animals, to a higher grade in the scale of creation? What if it should please Him, in the great regeneration, when He makes us 'equal to the angels,' to make them what we are now? Thus in that day all the vanity to which they are now helplessly subject will be abolished; they will suffer no more, either from within or without; the days of their groaning will be ended. In the new earth as well as the new heavens, there will be nothing to give pain, but everything that the wisdom and goodness of God can create to give happiness. As a recompense for what they once suffered while under the 'bondage of corruption,' when God has 'renewed the face of the earth' and their corruptible bodies have put on incorruption, they shall enjoy happiness, suited to their state, without alloy, without interruption, and without end."
Rev. Dr. Edward B. Pusey says that "all nature, having suffered together, shall be restored together. As to us, death is to be the gate of immortality and glory, so in some way to them creation includes all created beings, and all creation must include our nature too, in that one common groan and pang."
The great philosopher and theologian, Bishop Butler, says: "We cannot argue from the reason of the thing that death is the destruction of living agents. Neither can we find anything in the whole analogy of nature to afford us even the slightest presumption that animals ever lose their living powers; much less, if it were possible, that they lose them by death. The immortality of brutes does not necessarily imply that they are endowed with any latent capacities of a rational or moral nature. The economy of the universe might require that there should be immortal creatures with, out any capacities of this kind."
Canon Wilberforce, in an eloquent speech before a meeting of the Anti-Vivisection Society in London said he believed that "these beautiful and useful forms of life, which are sometimes so cruelly tortured, are bound to pass over into another sphere, and that in the great eternal world men and animals should sink or swim together."
Rev. Joseph Cook says: "Do not facts require us to hold that the immortal part in animals having higher than automatic endowments is external to the nervous mechanism in them as well as in man? What are we to say if we find that straightforwardness may lead us to the conclusion that Agassiz was not unjustifiable when he affirmed, in the name of science, that instinct may be immortal, and when he expressed, in his own name, the ardent hope that it might be so. Shall we, too, not hope that this highest conception of paradise may be the true one? Would it not be a diminution of supreme bliss not to have union with God through these, the most majestic of His works below ourselves?"
Agassiz, the greatest scientist we ever have had on this continent, and a man of profound religious convictions, was a firm believer in some future life for lower animals. He says: "Most of the arguments of philosophy in favor of the immortality of man apply equally to the permanency of the immortal principle in other living beings. May I not add that a future life in which man should be deprived of that great source of enjoyment, and intellectual and moral improvement, which result from the contemplation of the harmonies of an organic world, would involve a lamentable loss; and may we not look to a spiritual concert of the combined worlds and all their inhabitants in the presence of their Creator, as the highest conception of paradise? In some incomprehensible way, God Almighty has created these beings, and I cannot doubt of their immortality any more than I doubt of my own."
Rev. Dr. Adam Clark, one among the greatest theologians of his day, makes the following plain and unmistakable statement: "It does not appear that the animal creation are capable of a choice: and it is evident that they are not placed in their present misery, through either their choice or their sin; and if no purpose of God can be ultimately frustrated these creatures must be restored to that state of happiness for which they have been made, and of which they have been deprived through the transgression of man. Had not sin entered into the world, they would have had much greater enjoyments, without pain, excessive labor, and toil, and without death, and all those sufferings which arise from the fall. It is therefore obvious that the gracious purpose of God has not been fulfilled in them; and that, as they have not lost their happiness through their own fault, both the beneficence and justice of God are bound to make them a reparation. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that, as from the present constitution of things they cannot have the happiness designed for them in this state, they must have it in another."
Mrs. Mary Somerville, who was a member of the philosophical societies and academies of science both in England and Germany, and who was noted, the world over, for her scientific knowledge and womanly virtues, when speaking on the subject of death, said: "I shall regret the sky, the sea, with all the changes of their beautiful coloring; the earth, with its verdure and flowers: but far more shall I grieve to leave animals who have followed our steps affectionately for years, without knowing for certain their ultimate fate, though I firmly believe that the living principle is never extinguished. I am sincerely happy to find that I am not the only believer in the immortality of the lower animals."
Miss Frances Power Cobbe, of England, a noted writer, says: "I will venture to say plainly that, so far as appears to me, there is no possible solution of this heart-wearing question save the bold assumption that the existence of animals does not end at death. It is absolutely necessary to postulate a future life for the tortured dog or cat or horse or monkey, if we would escape the unbearable conclusion that a sentient creature, unoffending, nay, incapable of giving offense, has been given by the Creator an existence which, on the whole, has been a curse. That conclusion would be blasphemy. Rejecting it with all the energy of our souls, we find ourselves logically driven to assume the future life of lower animals."
Rev. J. G. Wood, author of "Man and Beast," says: "I feel sure that animals will have the opportunity of developing their latent faculties in the next world, though their free scope has been denied to them in the short time of their existence in the present world. They surpass many human beings in love, unselfishness, generosity, conscience, and self-sacrifice. I claim for them a higher status in creation than is generally attributed to them, and claim they have a future life in which they can be compensated for the suffering which so many of them have to undergo in this world. I am quite sure that most of the cruelties which are perpetrated on animals are due to the habit of considering them as mere machines, without susceptibilities, without reason, and without the capacity of a future."
George T. Angell, President of the American Humane Education Society, and a noted humanitarian, says, "Can there be any doubt that the Almighty, who has given them (animals) one life, has power, if He wishes, to give them another? In God's great universe, comprising as it does perhaps millions of worlds larger than our own, is there not room enough for all?"
Rev. Canon I. T. Carter, a noted English clergyman, says: "We may, moreover, connect with the resurrection of our Lord, the hope for restoration of the entire creation; for the whole world looks forward to that future state. As the whole world of creation around us suffers from the effect of the fall, so in some way they will know a resurrection, and be transformed into a pure, more blessed, more beautiful, state. The lowest creatures are not to be destroyed, but after their manner, according to their kind, will be restored, giving praise and glory to 1 Him who created them.'"
Rev. Robert Eyton makes the following beautiful remarks: "To some of us it would be a great sorrow to think that after this life we are forever entirely and hopelessly separated from that animal world in which many of the deepest of our interests are to be found. It would seem strange to us to think that man should have this world as his home, and should form those wonderful and beautiful relations with many of the animals below him that he now does, and then afterwards, in the new earth, these relations should cease, and that God is then to be looked on henceforth as the God of human beings only, and not of the animal creation. But when we think of animals as being objects of God's creative love, it at once puts us in a new relation towards them and gives us a new hope about their future."
Rev. H. Kirby, of England, says: "We are led to conclude that the suffering, violence, and death which animals have to endure, either at the hand of man or of other animals, did not exist until after the fall of man, and that therefore they are one of the consequences of sin. In other words, the lower animals, who themselves are not guilty of any sin, are nevertheless, undergoing a share of the punishment due to man's sin.
"This would lead us to suppose, from what we know of God's goodness, justice, and equity, that if guilty men are to enjoy the benefits of Christ's Incarnation and Atonement, and are to receive much more than an equivalent for their miseries and suffering, then innocent animals may in all reason look for some recompense for all the ills which they now endure: and since there seems to be but little alleviation of their troubles in the present life, we infer that it may take place in a future and immortal life, of which they are capable from their twofold nature of body and soul."
Dr. John Fulton, of New York, a clergyman of deep piety and bright intellect, recently made the following statement: "This is a redeemed world, with not one suffering creature that has been left out of Christ's all-embracing redemption. And more, I dare believe that St. Paul was right when he looked upon this redeemed world, and seeing how its lower orders are groaning and suffering together with us, even until now, he was inspired to prophesy of a better time, when their redemption and ours shall be perfected together, and the glory that is to be revealed shall surpass all the present suffering. My own belief is that, in some way, which I do not pretend to understand, but in which I can nevertheless believe, the salvation of Christ is broad enough to include and does include the dumb creation."
But one could continue to mention hundreds of noted divines, authors, and scientists, of modern times, as well as ancient writers, who have expressed themselves as believing in the immortality of animals. The doctrine was maintained by a large majority of ancient philosophers, though like the immortality of man, it was of a very uncertain and crude nature.
The old school of Platonists claimed that the souls of all living creatures were a part of the universal soul of the world, and that they were depressed or immerged in the animal body, and when the body died the soul would go to some other living being, sometimes to a man and sometimes to a lower animal.
This doctrine of the transmigration of souls, crude as it was, shows a noble and humane device of the ancients to deter men from indulging in sordid and mean passions. To teach that the souls of men after their separation from the body should pass into the form of such animals as they most resembled in their dispositions, then to endure the horrors and suffering which they were guilty of inflicting, was a wholesome doctrine in those dark days.
If the souls of some of our two-legged animals who have wantonly abused and tortured so many of the quadrupeds should be transmigrated into their forms long enough to realize the regions of hell they have made for them on earth, the angels of mercy would undoubtedly shout, amen!
Menander, a Greek writer, speaking on the subject of transmigration, said to Crato, "When you die you will have a second existence; therefore choose what creature you would like to be, dog, sheep, goat, horse, or man." To which he replied, "Make me anything rather than a man, for he is the only creature that prospers by injustice." Though this was spoken many hundred years ago, yet it is a lamentable fact that it has lost none of its truth.
The doctrine of the immortality of animals was maintained by many Jewish writers and a long list of ancient Christian writers could be mentioned.
Manasseh, a noted Jewish Rabbi, in his discourse on the resurrection, asserts that "dumb animals will have a much happier state than they ever enjoyed here when they with man shall rise again."
And Philo, in his book of future rewards, speaks as follows: "There is no doubt but that hereafter dumb animals will be divested of their ferocity, and become tame and gentle after the manner of other creatures whose dispositions are subdued to harmony and love."
Tertullian, a noted Christian writer, makes the following remarks: "There shall be an end of death, when the devil, its chief master, shall go away into the fire which God has prepared for him and his angels; when the manifestations of the sons of God shall release the world from evil, at present universally subject to it; when the innocence and purity of nature being restored, animals shall live in harmony with each other, and infants shall play without harm with animals once ferocious; when the Father shall have subdued His enemies to His Son and put all things in subjection under His feet."
No comments:
Post a Comment