|
Feedback archive → Feedback
2010
Can bunny rabbits be saved?
Will there be animals in the new Creation?
Published: 16 October 2010(GMT+10)
wikipedia.org
This weeks feedback comes because CMI supporter, Catherine O. responded to the article
by Gary Bates, Is it unjust that
the whole creation should suffer because of Adam’s sin? In that article,
Gary says, he was responding to a previous comment on CMI’s position that
human beings are the only creatures (as in created by God) that can be saved. Moreover,
angels aside, human beings are also the only sentient, intelligent, moral, decision-capable
beings that God created. This was from his article
Did God create life on other planets?
Catherine O. wrote:
If you read Calvin’s commentary on Romans 8:19-23 and Isaiah 65:25, you’ll find he takes the plain sense:
when Christ returns, he will restore creation to the way it was before the Fall,
which means that bunny rabbits can and will be saved. Calvin is on the net [withheld per CMI’s feedback rules]
and the editor’s notes tell us that Luther and “the greater part of
the Lutheran and Reformed Divines” were in agreement here. But if CMI “takes
no stand on eschatology” this should include animal immortality.
Gary Bates responds:
Catherine, CMI indeed avoids taking a particular view on eschatology as it falls
outside our ministry mandate of dealing with origins. That is not to say that we
don’t think it is an important subject. It’s just that we believe there
are many good ministries out there that deal specifically with this subject. We
often get asked for opinions on a range of subjects outside of our core area. But
we try not to be all things to all people, as we risk becoming ‘nothing’,
as in losing our focus. This is why we prefer instead to concentrate on areas that
we specialize in, such as the origins debate. This is a long-winded way of also
saying that there are many different views on eschatology and this includes interpretations
on many passages that talk about the Restoration as we shall see.
If Calvin spoke about God restoring His Creation to the way it was before the Fall
it does not necessarily follow that animals will be saved and resurrected. We have
always understood that it referred to restoring it back to an Edenic-like paradise
the way it was before the Fall. In the new heavens and the new earth it is clear
that this will be the case because of the following passage in Revelation 21:1,4 and
22: 2 3.
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth
had passed away …He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no
more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed
away. … In the middle of its [the new Jerusalem] street, and on either side
of the river, was the tree of life … And there shall be no more
curse (emphases mine).
Christ died for humans because humans sinned—not the animals.
The passages you mention in Romans 8 cite ‘the creation’ as being cursed.
This clearly refers to the whole creation (the universe) otherwise why would be
God be making a new one (because the old one is cursed)? “New heaven and new
earth” and “first heaven and first earth” are merisms, opposite
extremes which encompass everything in between. So it is saying that there will
be an entirely new physical universe, because the first physical universe passed
away. It clearly says that in the Restoration, there will be no more Curse; given
that the Curse entered due to the events in the Garden of Eden it is clearly pointing
back to that Pre-Fall Eden-like scenario (though the new heavens and earth will
be different from Eden in some important ways; for instance, we will be unable to
sin and we will not reproduce). The Bible teaches that there will be no death, disease,
or sin in the Restoration.
Adam incurred the Curse because of his disobedience (and he was warned that would
happen). However, the fate of animals is an entirely different question. To suggest
that animals will be saved is like asking “do animals go to heaven?”.
As much as I hate to destroy any wishful thinking that our favourite pooches will
be resurrected along with us, I believe the answer is no. Although the animals are
nephesh creatures in that they have
a soul, they are not made in the image of God and do not have
human souls. Jesus was called the last Adam
(1 Corinthians 15:45) because His atoning work came to undo
the work of the first Adam (man) whose sin was passed to all human beings as his
descendents. Hebrews 2:16–17 is clear that only humans qualify
for salvation and not even the angels can be saved:
The Bible indicates that the new Creation will not only be a ‘spiritual’
home but a physical one.
For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham.
Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might
become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation
for the sins of the people.
Also, the Bible indicates that Jesus had to be related to us so that He could act
as our kinsman-redeemer (Isaiah 59:20). So, it is clear that one has to be a human
to be saved. This would eliminate animals as candidates for salvation. The redeemed
Church is also known collectively as Christ’s bride (Ephesians 5:22-33); one would hardly think that animals
are married to Christ. Christ died for humans because humans sinned—not the
animals. Romans 8:21-23 explains that:
We wait eagerly for … the redemption of our bodies.
This is mentioned in the context of the Creation being liberated from the bondage
of decay. So, although the whole Creation will be redeemed and restored, it only
mentions the resurrection (and transformation) of the original bodies of humans.
If God re-creates animals for the new heavens and earth, then they will have no
continuity with animals that we have here now.
This is not the same as saying there will be no animals in Heaven as part of the
Restoration. The Bible indicates that the new Creation will not only be a ‘spiritual’
home but a physical one. The Holy City will be made from gold and fine jewels (Revelation 21:18-19) and Jesus indicated that the Father’s
house had many rooms that were being prepared for believers. If we are not merely
ethereal spirit-like beings in Heaven, like some mistakenly think, then I can’t
see why there would be a problem. God’s redemptive plan was both for mankind
and the earth, so it might suggest room for animals in the new Creation. In the
original Creation, when God made the animals that move along the ground according
to their kinds, He saw that it was good (Genesis 1:25). So, if animals were originally ‘good’
and part of God’s good Creation, it would be reasonable to assume there would
not be a problem having them in the restored new earth either.
One may well be able to draw analogies from the Great Flood of Noah’s time.
Man’s sin was once again the problem as it was corrupting the whole Earth.
The plan of repopulating a new Earth did not just extend to human beings; it was
extended to the animal kingdom also. Man was given dominion over the animals in
Genesis 1:28 so it is clear they were given for man’s benefit as well.
And remember that man derived benefit from animals in the pre-Fall world was long
before we were given the command to eat them after the Fall (clearly for man’s
benefit once again). I am trying to imply that animals may well have also been created
for man’s wellbeing and to magnify their Creator. It has been well-established
that animals bring comfort for human beings. Romans 1:20 exhorts that all Creation magnifies its Creator.
This may also be part of animals’ roles in a no-death restored Creation.
Isaiah 65 —The Millennium or new Earth?
You mentioned Isaiah 65:25, which says:
The wolf and the lamb shall graze together; the lion shall eat straw like the ox
…
This is one of those mysterious passages that is often interpreted according to
one’s eschatology (end times view). Many think that it refers to Christ’s
1,000 year reign on Earth—commonly known as the Millennium. Others with a
different end times view see it as being the result of an extended process of progressive
restoration, prior to the final time when death is overcome, too. While others still
subscribe to the view that it refers to the new Earth because it indicates that
animals won’t be eating each other anymore, which is taken to mean there is
no more death. However, Isaiah 65 also talks about people living to vast ages again,
but then dying. Isaiah 65:20 says:
For the young man shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner a hundred years
old shall be accursed
So, it is difficult seeing this passage referring to an eternal Kingdom of some
type, yet
verse 17 says:
For behold I create new heavens and a new earth
So, although we are unsure specifically of which restored Kingdom the Isaiah passages
refer to, or both, it doesn’t really matter. I don’t believe there is
any biblical basis for believing that animals will be resurrected as humans will
be. Rabbits are not made in the image of God and there is no spirit in, or of, them
that lives beyond death. I hope these thoughts help.
Readers’ commentsHoward B., Israel
Thank-you for this article, as I, too, have to give a similar response to those who think that their beloved pets (and we have one, too!) are going to have a heavenly inheritance.
Regarding the Isaiah passage on the new heavens and new earth–which for me clearly refers to the ‘very good’ Millennial Kingdom for the reasons you state–I liken it to a born-again person now: we are a new creation, but there is still sin in us, and we wait for the full adoption of our bodily resurrection for eternity in the ‘perfect’ New Heavens and New Earth.
Shirley G., USA
Wonderful research. I appreciate that you use scripture to interpret scripture. I now feel better prepared to answer the question I know one day I will be asked from my 4 year old granddaughter when her beloved yellow lab dies. I wish I had read this when her daddy, my son, asked such questions when he was a child.
Thank you.
Blessings,
Shirley G.
Aaron C., USA
In the eternal kingdom, I think it would seem as if something were missing if that great variety of animals would not be included. Gary responds:
I agree, and the article made that point.
It all gives glory to God. As to whether animals that die here are ‘revived’ to the kingdom is certainly a difficult question to ascertain an answer for.
Gary replies I don’t think it’s that difficult really. Let’s consider. The Bible’s speaks about the Gospel’s big picture, the Creation, The Fall of man, the Redemption of man and the Restoration/Creation of a new heavens and Earth. The purpose of Creation was to bring forward a bride for Christ. The article pointed out that one had to be a descendent of Adam to be saved. Animals do not qualify. As humans we have a conscience, a sense of morality, and as sinners we become aware of our fallen state before God. God helps us (While we were yet sinners Christ died for us). Animals have no way of understanding or accepting these concepts. While there may be new animals in the restored Creation, will I be meeting my resurrected lamb roast dinner? I mention this to highlight the problem and make the point that such a view is unbiblical.
However, if you think about it, a lot of degradation has happened to the information of genes in animals. A short stubby pug with a smashed muzzle is perhaps less than perfect. It would be sad for it to be in that form eternally. So I think God will create a new, and perfect group of animals for the kingdom.
Gary replies An interesting point that I had not considered. However, humans have probably suffered some degradation too from our original perfected state, so what will we be resurrected to? We obviously won’t be carrying our physical infirmities with us to Heaven. So, I am not sure that the mutated pug idea is a strong argument. However, I do encourage the critical thinking that you are showing. A lot of respondents have actually been quite angry due to implications that I said, effectively, that their beloved Fifi won’t be with them in Heaven.
R W., UK
I would agree with most of the above, however, I would be more adamant that animals most definitely WILL be in heaven as we read in the Revelation about how Jesus returns to earth riding a white horse, plus there are the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse-I see no reason with such statements to allegorise them, as they seem pretty specific to me. And as the article points out, certainly God is taking us back to the beginning and recreating everything as it was then before the Fall, and if Adam walked with the animals then, and we know that eventually the Lion will lie down with the Lamb, I feel we can be confident in sharing heaven (or perhaps rather, the new earth) with animals-and why not our pets whom we’ve known-I find it hard to accept that God would grant us the capacity to have such a unique relationship with these animals, if He were not going to grant that to continue for His children-but ultimately I’m not going to build a doctrine on it or fall out with anyone over a differing view :) Lita Cosner responds:
We do believe that there will most probably be animals in Heaven. These will be new creations, however, not resurrected animals which lived and died on this earth. So I believe that the special relationship that we have with animals on this earth will continue in some sense, because there will be animals in the new heavens and earth will serve a similar purpose, but we won’t meet our beloved pets who have died.
You said: “I find it hard to accept that God would grant us the capacity to have such a unique relationship with these animals, if He were not going to grant that to continue for His children.” Then what about our unsaved family? We have a unique relationship with them also, but we can be sure from Scripture that they won’t be resurrected to eternal life in Heaven, unfortunately.
This is because the resurrection is only possible for humans because of our blood relationship through Adam to Jesus—He is our relative so can act as our kinsman-redeemer. But animals cannot have this hope.
|
Related articles
| We support belief in an intelligent designer—the God of the Bible. This site was also ‘intelligently designed’. But rather than six days, it’s taken thousands of days. Help us design more information for this site.  | | |
|
