Christian beliefs about the relationship between humans and animals

10 biblical truths about animals | ERLC

christian beliefs about the relationship between humans and animals

According to Christian belief, God created the universe. Genesis 1 - it states that animals, and finally humans, were created on day six; Genesis 2 - it implies. The relationship between Christianity and animal rights has been a complex one that's varied . He's written that how non-humans are "reconciled to God in Jesus Christ and will be redeemed by God in the new creation" accordingly creates. How did human–animal relationships contribute to the development of human religion? Can animals be considered religious subjects? We will shortly consider .

In karma, the previous life acts as the factor that determines the condition into which a being, after a stay in heaven or hell, is reborn in one form or another.

Causing unnecessary pain and death produces bad karma with ill-effects on oneself as a consequence of ill-treatment of others. The Vedas set out the code of sarva-bhuta-hita devotion to the good of all creatureswhich says that people should see the same life in all creatures regardless of their outer dress or bodies.

In fact the Vedas go so far as to say that those who cannot understand the principle of life in lesser beings are missing the meaning of life altogether and risk losing their sense of humanity.

Animal rights

Killing of an animal is seen as a violation of ahimsa and causes bad karma so vegetarianism is widespread among Hindus. Hinduism is not as strict concerning ahimsa as Jainism or Buddhism as Hindus at many times in history have eaten meat. Hinduism allows animal sacrifice to a limited extend in religious ceremonies.

And I believe animals should be given their rights. Today wherever I go, they talk of animal welfare. Animal welfare is not the answer - animal rights are needed. Every animal has certain fundamental rights and the first right of every animal is the right to live; for you must not take away what you cannot give. And since you cannot give life to a dead creature, you have no right to take away the life of a living one. The 18th century gave rights to man, the 19th century gave rights to slaves, and the 20th century gave rights to women.

The 21st century, I verily believe, will give rights to animals, and that will be a glorious day in the history of humanity. I believe there will be no peace on Earth unless we stop all killing.

It is eternal but not unchangeable, because it passes through an endless series of cycles. Jains believe that reality is made up of two eternal principles, jiva and ajiva. Jiva consists of an infinite number of identical spiritual units; ajiva that is, non-jiva is matter in all its forms and the conditions under which matter exists: The whole world is made up of jivas trapped in ajiva; there are jivas in rocks, plants, insects, animals, human beings, spirits, etc.

Karma and transmigration keep the jiva trapped in ajiva. The consequence of evil actions is a heavy karma, which weighs the jiva down, forcing it to enter its new life at a lower level in the scale of existence. The consequence of good deeds, on the other hand, is a light karma, which allows the jiva to rise in its next life to a higher level in the scale of existence, where there is less suffering to be endured.

The Jain ethic is a direct consequence of the philosophy of soul and karma. Jains are animists, for them, everything natural is living, and all life is sacred. Any kind of harm to any form of life is to be avoided or minimized. Of course, the sustenance of one form of life depends upon the death of another, yet the followers of Jainism are required to limit the taking of life even for survival.

Jains are strict vegetarians and practice ahimsa very strictly, they literally will not harm a fly. Some Jains will sweep the path before them and wear gauze masks over their mouths to make sure they will not harm small insects by unintentionally treading them or breathing them in. Jains build refuges and rest houses for old and diseased animals, where they are kept and fed until they die a natural death.

The welfare of animals and the continued survival of individuals are considered to be of great value. Buddhism is a religion and philosophy that developed from the teachings of the Buddha Gautama, who lived in the 6th century BC.

Buddha Gautama taught the four noble truths: In Buddhist teaching, the law of karma, says that for every event that occurs, there will follow another event whose existence was caused by the first, and this second event will be pleasant or unpleasant according as its cause was skilful or unskilful. So Buddhist law says that those who cause violence and suffering to living things will experience that same pain at some time in the future. The Buddhist view on animals is illustrated in the Jakata stories Buddhist lessons.

Buddha is born as different animals in previous births, so killing animals is equated with killing humans. Most Buddhists do not eat farm animals, hence they place high value on a better life and hence to good welfare in animals, including good health.

Buddhists should get no companionship from animals, there should be no hunting of animals and many Buddhists buy and release wildlife as a way to reduce suffering.

The Islamic religion The Islamic religion teaches that Allah has given people power over animals. They believe that the world belongs to Allah and people are responsible to Him for their behaviour towards animals. Consequently, it is wrong to hunt merely for pleasure, to use its skin, to cause animals to fight each other, to incite them to act unnaturally, or to molest them unnecessarily.

The Prophet Muhammad taught that animals should be killed only out of necessity and that doing otherwise is a sin. They bear your heavy loads to lands you could not reach except with great personal effort.

Verily, your Lord is Compassionate and Merciful; He created horses, mules and donkeys for you to ride and ornament.

And He created what you do not know. None can hold them up in His Power except Allah. The societies seemed to differ in their views on humans and animals. There were four schools of thought in ancient Greece on human-animal relationships: He professed that the souls are indestructible and composed of fire or air, and move from human to animal or human in succeeding incarnations. Vitalism recognized the difference between organic and inorganic entities. Vitalists such as Aristotle to BC emphasized the interdependence of soul and body Ryder, A scale or ladder of nature has been recognized in which higher forms of life shared simple functions with lower forms resulting in complex behaviour.

This scheme of continuity could have been combined with the theory of evolution. The view of mechanism professes that humans and animals are mere machines and such as they are essentially the same without soul differentiating them from inanimate matter.

Anthropocentrism regarded humankind being in the centre of the world, and existence, welfare, and well-being as the ultimate aim of the universe. Everything in the universe was interpreted in term of humans and their values.

christian beliefs about the relationship between humans and animals

In fact, the modern philosophy has been started with the period of enlightenment and renaissance. At that time vivisection was a common practice when studying how animal organisms work. The eighteenth century was an age of enlightenment as notable figures of that time such as Voltaire toHume toand Rousseau to questioned the popular idea that animals feel no pain and that they are ours to do with as we please Singer, The enlightenment, however, did not affect all thinkers equally in the matter.

Kant toin his lectures on ethics, still stated that: We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals. Effectively, Kant is taking the view here that animals have only instrumental value, morally speaking: Our duties towards animals are merely indirect duties towards humanity. Bentham in a definitive answer to Kant stated that: Nor Can they talk?

The sentence cited is widely quoted by those concerns about animals. Thus, the concept of utilitarianism was first explicitly articulated by Jeremy Bentham — and further developed by John Stuart Mill to In deciding whether an action is morally right, the total amount of good the action will bring about is weighed against the total amount of harm that will be caused Mill, Although a lot of people may think that Singer supports a rights-based view, he bases vegetarian lifestyle on an animal welfarist and a hedonistic utilitarian position rather than on any claim about of killing animals being wrong.

He justifies his position with what he calls the replaceability argument stating: They want to protect the weak from the strong and the few from the many. Some of those advocating animal rights think that using animals for food production, clothing, research, entertainment, recreation or any other human benefit is unacceptable.

Problems associated with claiming human or animal rights and the advantages of referring instead to the obligations of each of us are discussed by Broom Deontological positions involve each individual considering their duties when deciding what action to take. The first part of this view uses a deontological argument whilst the second part is consequentialist or utilitarian.

christian beliefs about the relationship between humans and animals

Wholly deontological and wholly utilitarian positions lead to some untenable situations. Advocacy for good welfare in animals may arise from deontological or utilitarian arguments, or from combinations of the two. The deontological position often includes the idea that animals have a quality or telos that is of value and means that they should be treated with compassion and dignity Naconecy, Once the view that animal welfare, a characteristic of an individual which ranges from very positive to very negative, is important.

Its precise definition and measurement becomes necessary Dawkins, ; Duncan, ; Broom, ; The concept includes the adaptive responses, feelings and health of the individual and its history is described by Broom The concept of human dominion over animals has two interpretations such as a humans treat animals however they wish or b responsible and compassionate use of animals for the betterment of society is acceptable.

Regan believes in the inherent value of individuals and that the interests of all animals should be weighed equally whatever their form.

Sociological and philosophical educational efforts can be seen in the work of Rollin who points out that science is driven and guided by social values. Hence husbandry can be considered historically as at the root of animal production and animal science. For example, Pascalev asked: Is it moral to genetically engineer farm animals and can the need for greater productivity justify the genetic modification of such animals?

Should we change the natural capacities of animals e. What is the moral status of animals with human genes or genes from other animal species? What is involved in respecting animals? As this paper explains the roles of animals in cultures, traditions and religions, it has implications for all people. Ways of thinking, ideas and behaviour of human beings may be changed by having an awareness of this subject.

The similarities in attitudes to animal welfare can be used as an argument for harmony in human societies in the subject matter. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Indicators of poor welfare. Assessing welfare and suffering. The use of the concept Animal Welfare in European conventions, regulations and directives; p.

The evolution of morality and religion. The evolution of morality. Appl Anim Behav Sci. They make up for their lack of language by finding other ways through their reasoning abilities to communicate their will. In the Bible, God reveals animal intelligence through the unusual encounter of Balaam with his donkey Num. In that incident, the donkey saw the Angel of the Lord standing in the way and moved aside.

Furthermore, we have all seen animals use tools to get food. Also, we have all seen animals run from danger. It must understand something about life in order to seek to protect itself. We credit reason for human responses to avoiding danger.

Animals may have a more acute awareness of spiritual reality than we realize The incident of Balaam and his donkey brings into focus another insight about animals. It reveals that it is possible for animals to see angels Num. The text does not say the Angel of the Lord revealed his presence to the donkey.

BBC - Religions - Christianity: Animal rights

It tells us simply that the donkey saw the Angel. Humans see angels when the angels want to reveal themselves.

The donkey saw the Angel of the Lord without his self-revelation. We could understand it if the Angel said he wanted the donkey to help Balaam avoid the fate he had planned for him.

But the text does not say that. A plain reading of the text suggests that the donkey was actually frustrating the plan of the Angel. This conclusion gains further support when we see that the Lord had to empower the donkey to speak v. If Moses recognized the need to tell the reader the Lord empowered the donkey to speak, he could just as easily have said the Lord enabled the donkey to see the Angel of the Lord. While we should not attempt to develop a major doctrine around this single event, it still raises significant questions about our understanding of the relationship of animals to the spiritual world.

Animals have the capacity to enjoy life The psalmist was lighthearted when he described the joy animals feel. King David used this word to describe his celebration as the ark of God was being brought to Jerusalem 2 Samuel 6: The psalmist said this beast of the sea can also be ecstatic.

The book of Job supplies additional insight. There, God, himself, described the joy animals experience. We have all seen animals playing. The testimony of Scripture and our own experience remind us that animals are more than automatons driven by instinct. They are beings with the capacity for joy. Animals appear to lack the capacity for moral reflection.

They simply do what they do. Scripture supports this understanding. It was humans who ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, not animals Gen. This observation of animal innocence is not only important for our understanding of animals.

It also helps us understand our sense of justice. When we ask why we are offended by cruelty to animals, we recognize we are reacting to an innate sense within us that is repulsed by wanton violations of their innocence and vulnerability.

This recognition helps us understand some of our motivations for our criminal justice system. When we punish acts of aggression against our fellow humans, we are responding to violations of their innocence and vulnerability. Such violations should be punished. Our sense of justice demands it.

UNLIKELY Friendships in the Animal Kingdom

Furthermore, we learn about divine justice from animals. Scripture teaches that rebellion against God is sin. In other words, God requires justice. Either the guilty person or an acceptable substitute must answer for human sin. God created the sacrificial system in Israel to help his people understand this reality. He commanded that this system regularly kill innocent animals in order to satisfy the demands of his divine justice Lev. The innocent animals would bear the sin of the people.

This bloody display served as a symbol for what was yet to come—when the innocent Son of God would offer himself as the true, eternal, substitutionary sacrifice for the sin of all humanity Rom. Animals belong to God Psalm In fact, God did not relinquish ownership of anything Col.

He even gave humans authority over it, and after the Flood, he gave us all of the rest of creation for food.

But none of this assignment of authority and power included a transfer of ownership. Humans serve a stewardship role toward creation, not an ownership role Gen. This stewardship pertains to everything and is intended to include an attitude of respect Lev. The animals are subject to humans, but they are not ours to do with as we will. They belong to God Job Conclusion The reader will no doubt notice that most of my biblical references are from the Hebrew Scriptures.

There are good reasons for this dearth. First, the New Testament is built on the revelation before it. It assumes the foundation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

So, there is no need to repeat what has been previously stated. Unless the New Testament affirms that its teachings supplant the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures, we are to accept their infallible guidance and truth as we do those of the New Testament. Second, the New Testament is dealing principally with the establishment of the church.

The writings that comprise it are mostly related to the immediate demands of this endeavor. Drawing from this entire biblical witness, we can make some important conclusions about how to think about animals.

First, we must recognize that animals may very well be co-inheritors with us of the new creation. In his letter to the church at Rome, the Apostle Paul said all of creation was subjected to the corrupting effects of the Fall and that the day is coming when it too shall be freed from this corruption Rom. There is no reason to suspect that animals are not part of this vision of a redeemed creation.

The prophet Isaiah saw a day when humans and animals would live once again in perfect harmony Is. The Apostle Paul may be telling us this is a vision of eternity, not only of the millennium.

But given these statements from Isaiah and Paul, we should give more consideration to the place of animals in eternity.