do animals have souls

now i know this is based off of an old post but what do you think happens to animals who die. i found that my religioned believes that christ died for them to that is the mormon belief. refrence book of mormon doctrine and covenants chapter 77, verse 2 wich states
"Q. What are we to understand by the four beasts, spoken of in the same verse?
A. They are afigurative expressions, used by the Revelator, John, in describing bheaven, the cparadise of God, the dhappiness of man, and of beasts, and of creeping things, and of the fowls of the air; that which is spiritual being in the likeness of that which is temporal; and that which is temporal in the likeness of that which is spiritual; the espirit• of man in the likeness of his person, as also the spirit of the fbeast•, and every other creature which God has created."

While I don't dispute that animals have souls, I would like to make clear that there is no definitive LDS (Mormon) church policy (that I am aware of) regarding what happens to them when they die, or whether Christ's grace was needed for them to return to heaven. The church is, foremost, interested in the salvation of mankind. Other concerns tend to fall into the realm of speculation.

perhaps i was misunderstood. i was told that animals also are resurected and go to heaven. from the teacher at the institute though i may have misinterpreted what was said i will ask some more of the subject.

If you believe in karma, then your new puppy may very well be one of your grandparents reincarnate. personally, though, i never really looked too deep into the subject of animals and souls, i just always assumed they had one. All dogs go to heaven, that's my take on things.

Just to start off, I've never not believed animals have souls, although my point I'm about to make just further confirms it. At least for me. If anyone has ever had a strong bond with a pet, or animal, or dealt with sick, or injured animals, and the looks they can give you, should be more than enough for most to know there is some form of, at the very least higher level of sentient mind, and/or spirit most give animals credit for. Of course, I'm not specifying the degree of sentient mind, since that a person could debate until blue in the face.

I think you'll find that very few people agree on the differences and definitions of souls and spirits and sentiency. Most people at my seminary still have trouble remembering and understanding the definitions according to our denomination alone, much less everyone else's. It's kinda sad really... =/

From what I understand, the soul is the mind, will, and emotions. As far as I'm concerned, animals have souls and can experience those things to the fullness of their meaning. A spirit is our relationship with God on the level that we alone are created in His image (and that image includes every aspect of our being, including the intangible imagery like sentiency and such). I'm not sure if animals have spirits of their own, but I believe they can't have the Holy Spirit within them, and thusly that aspect is limited. My understanding of sentiency recalls the ability to reason, which even highly secular humanities classes in college will tell you sets man apart from every other creature in existence. With that in mind, I don't believe animals are sentient. I believe they can do pretty good immitations, and I believe some have astounding memories and some mental association/correlation that mirrors sentient reasoning, but... I digress.

This is another reason.. but very small reason why I don't agree with the modern religion. (Rather Any religion that was created based off of christ or the like that cropped up only after the last 2000 years ) And returned to the more older belief system of Paganism.. With the pagans, animals and man all go to mother earth, their energy, aura, escense, whichever term you want to use, ALL become one.. None of this seperate plane of existence crap for one or the other. No doggy heaven for dogs.. No cat heaven for felines.. Just ONE place for all.

Well, maybe I'm prejudiced, because I ever had pets, and I ever had a certain bond to animals, but I believe that they must have something like a soul.
Of course, I'm just like all the others pet owners:
I see in my pet (a rabbit named Hazelwood) a unique personality, a really special creature, and I do love her, like any other member of my family. (sorry, I know I should say "it", but that's someting I couldn't do. It sounds like Hazelwood would be a thing ... )

I read some books about the topic "Do animals have souls?" or "Are animals intelligent?", hear a lot of differents opions, but they don't change my point of view.

I believe that animals have something like a soul, as I said it. Humans are animals as well, or aren't we? We also have instincts, just like animals. - And just because we call ourselves "smarter" than animals, we are allowed to say that they haven't any feelings or souls?

Guess the most of feelings are based on instincts, like the love between mother and child, based on the mother - instinct and the helpless of a child, that needs someone who cares for it.
Just for example ... and do you know the friendships between animals? Or the forever "unions" between some animals? ....

I would think they would have souls. :)

Nope, animals don't have souls. I think it's the truth at least in this universe which God create. People who say that animals do have souls are just anthropomorphizing them, which's a common thing we do to our pets. :wink:

But on the other hand, I don't think that gives us rights to abuse animals.

Nope, animals don't have souls. I think it's the truth at least in this universe which God create. People who say that animals do have souls are just anthropomorphizing them, which's a common thing we do to our pets. :wink:

But on the other hand, I don't think that gives us rights to abuse animals.

i would have to disagree i mean i have heard of animals running into burning buildings against instinct with no prior training to save someone. that tells me animals must have something. i men how can anyone think themselfs so suppior to animals when we are more rebelious than any other creature

Nope, animals don't have souls. I think it's the truth at least in this universe which God create. People who say that animals do have souls are just anthropomorphizing them, which's a common thing we do to our pets. :wink:

But on the other hand, I don't think that gives us rights to abuse animals.

i would have to disagree i mean i have heard of animals running into burning buildings against instinct with no prior training to save someone. that tells me animals must have something. i men how can anyone think themselfs so suppior to animals when we are more rebelious than any other creature

That's the point. Thus far, the ability or decision of some dog or pig to run into a house beset by fire or gaseous fumes has only showed that they're definitely able to tell when something's wrong and that their owners definitely know to pay attentino to their animals. And on that note, it looks exponentially more like blind loyalty rather than reasoning. Humans are rebellious in nature because we're harder to tame; we're more likely to rebel because we're able to perceive better when someone is tryign to dupe us. Perception. You can tame humans, too, and then they'd follow blindly, and you probably wouldn't hear people debating whether or not they had souls. Anyway. I'm surprised this is still a living discussion.

I'm gonna hafta agree with Leejackobson and Tortillian that animals do, in fact, have souls. This is based simply on the fact that they eat, breathe, communicate, grow, mate, live, die, reason (yes, i do believe animals can, in fact, reason. If you don't believe me, just watch your dog the next time it wants a treat. It will tell you.) Animals share the same basic physical makeup that humans do, with organs, blood, etc, begging the question: if Animals don't have souls, and are living creatures, then what constitutes the belief that we have souls? I know that's a fallacy of logic, beleif by false association, but i do believe it raises an interesting quiestion. Besides, if animals didn't have souls, wouldn't they live forever? I mean, death is technically the soul's seperation from the body, isn't it? And if animals don't have souls, then death shouldn't concern them? Either that, or i'm missing something (which is possible, it happens all the time)

Nope, animals don't have souls. I think it's the truth at least in this universe which God create. People who say that animals do have souls are just anthropomorphizing them, which's a common thing we do to our pets. :wink:

But on the other hand, I don't think that gives us rights to abuse animals.

i would have to disagree i mean i have heard of animals running into burning buildings against instinct with no prior training to save someone. that tells me animals must have something. i men how can anyone think themselfs so suppior to animals when we are more rebelious than any other creature

That's the point. Thus far, the ability or decision of some dog or pig to run into a house beset by fire or gaseous fumes has only showed that they're definitely able to tell when something's wrong and that their owners definitely know to pay attentino to their animals. And on that note, it looks exponentially more like blind loyalty rather than reasoning. Humans are rebellious in nature because we're harder to tame; we're more likely to rebel because we're able to perceive better when someone is tryign to dupe us. Perception. You can tame humans, too, and then they'd follow blindly, and you probably wouldn't hear people debating whether or not they had souls. Anyway. I'm surprised this is still a living discussion.

if its nothing but blind loyalty then why is it not an absolute thing. not all dogs will go into the building most choose to follow instinct or some will retrieve help instead. some will run away why does each animal respond some what differently. why does no 2 animals respond to danger in the same exact way. because they do reason maybe not at a level we can understand but yes they do reason.

Well, it's just my personal belief that animals don't have souls. :)

Btw, are the majority of the members on this forum Mormons? If so, I'm gonna keep my mouth shut on religious topics here, or raise wonderful hell. :wink:

i dont know about most of the forume being mormon but feel free to express your opinion so long as you stay within simons rules.

i dont know about most of the forume being mormon but feel free to express your opinion so long as you stay within simons rules.

Browsing through the old posts here, I become clearly aware of that Simon is a Mormon or LDS too. So what I'm going to say could get myself officially screwed. But since this cartoon forum allows religious discussions(Which, imho, is not a good idea.), I feel an urge to express myself.

Being a Protestant fundamentalist( Inerrancy of the Bible(KJV. Not literal Inerrancy), the virgin birth and deity of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of Salvation by Faith Alone, the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ and the bodily second coming of Jesus Christ ), I must deny that animals have souls, because the Bible gives clear hints that only humans have both living souls and the breath of life(Genesis 2:7). Animals have only the breath of life(Genesis 1:30; 6:17; 7:15,22). And by the grace of God, we are made far more superior than animals(Genesis 1:26-27), and animals are not made in the image and likeness of God. Being made in the image and likeness of God means that we are like God, capable of spirituality, with mind, emotion, and free will(Compatibilist free will), and, have an aspect of being that continues after death. If animals had an immaterial aspect, it would therefore be of a different and lesser quality than human's soul. And this difference probably meant this so-called "animal soul" do not carry on after death.

And Leejakobson, I've read almost all your posts here. From them, I can tell that you're a very good and kind person. I sincerely hope you can read this[=http://www.carm.org/mormon.htm]this and think about it. God bless you and your family! :)

Well, maybe I take this a little too seriously, and sorry for sounding like such a dogmatic bigot. But decent Christian faith should be defended against that bright morning star fell from Heaven(Isa. 14:12). And the brother of the devil can only be devil, not Christ.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][=http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby.jpg][img="]http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][/url]

Browsing through the old posts here, I become clearly aware of that Simon is a Mormon or LDS too. So what I'm going to say could get myself officially screwed. But since this cartoon forum allows religious discussions(Which, imho, is not a good idea.), I feel an urge to express myself.

As long as you respect the beliefs of others (not just me), then I see no reason you'd have a problem. In any case, it takes more than a link to some other site to shake me of my own faith. Just keep in mind that this is primarily a place to discuss NIMH; while I don't mind the occasional religious topic, I would prefer most of the conversation regarding religious themes take place elsewhere, if it doesn't have anything to do with NIMH. If any topic gets out of hand (not just religious ones) I will lock the thread.

As for the topic at hand, I'm of the opinion that there is likely something of animals that is eternal, be it a soul or whatever. But again, as I stated before, that's just my personal opinion and isn't a doctrine of the LDS church, which has remained silent on the issue officially.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][=http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby.jpg][img="]http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][/url][/quote]

That's some cool artwork. Maybe you'd like to have it posted in the Fan Art Gallery?

Browsing through the old posts here, I become clearly aware of that Simon is a Mormon or LDS too. So what I'm going to say could get myself officially screwed. But since this cartoon forum allows religious discussions(Which, imho, is not a good idea.), I feel an urge to express myself.

As long as you respect the beliefs of others (not just me), then I see no reason you'd have a problem. In any case, it takes more than a link to some other site to shake me of my own faith. Just keep in mind that this is primarily a place to discuss NIMH; while I don't mind the occasional religious topic, I would prefer most of the conversation regarding religious themes take place elsewhere, if it doesn't have anything to do with NIMH. If any topic gets out of hand (not just religious ones) I will lock the thread.

As for the topic at hand, I'm of the opinion that there is likely something of animals that is eternal, be it a soul or whatever. But again, as I stated before, that's just my personal opinion and isn't a doctrine of the LDS church, which has remained silent on the issue officially.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][=http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby.jpg][img="]http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][/url][/quote]

That's some cool artwork. Maybe you'd like to have it posted in the Fan Art Gallery?[/quote]

The art is great and on Desert Mouse`s site it`s free, likiddingli as far as my faith I`m reformed Protestant li lots of different blood hereli,
And that I disagree with Simon some things and in fact others may find agreement, We tend to try as we can to understand each other. But animation,,, rock on.. 8)

Browsing through the old posts here, I become clearly aware of that Simon is a Mormon or LDS too. So what I'm going to say could get myself officially screwed. But since this cartoon forum allows religious discussions(Which, imho, is not a good idea.), I feel an urge to express myself.

As long as you respect the beliefs of others (not just me), then I see no reason you'd have a problem. In any case, it takes more than a link to some other site to shake me of my own faith. Just keep in mind that this is primarily a place to discuss NIMH; while I don't mind the occasional religious topic, I would prefer most of the conversation regarding religious themes take place elsewhere, if it doesn't have anything to do with NIMH. If any topic gets out of hand (not just religious ones) I will lock the thread.

As for the topic at hand, I'm of the opinion that there is likely something of animals that is eternal, be it a soul or whatever. But again, as I stated before, that's just my personal opinion and isn't a doctrine of the LDS church, which has remained silent on the issue officially.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][=http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby.jpg][img="]http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/jakeCloudkicker/Nimh/JustinAndMrsBrisby_small.jpg[" alt=""/img][/url][/quote]

That's some cool artwork. Maybe you'd like to have it posted in the Fan Art Gallery?[/quote]i agree with simon in that what makes you think a single link can shake the solid foundation that is the faith i have i will not be upturn by such a dull plow. my soul is not so easily harvested away from the true church. by the way simon you planing on a misson or have you already gone on one.

i agree with simon in that what makes you think a single link can shake the solid foundation that is the faith i have i will not be upturn by such a dull plow. my soul is not so easily harvested away from the true church. by the way simon you planing on a misson or have you already gone on one.

I want you to know, even though, you still have my prayer. Please understand that I do not try to shake the foundation of your sincere faith or Simon's. I never doubted your true love and affection towards God. Allow me to put it this way, I just showed another point of view or path to you. The choice is always be yours, because Jesus also said:"Consequently they shall be your judges."(Matthew 12:27)

And God loves you, Leejakobson, God loves you so much that I believe it is God's will(Which, I served humbly, but I'm such a useless servant.) to show this to you. So you could choose according to your own will, and so you could be saved, and so when the last day comes, you shall have no excuse before our father.

Well, and I guess I must apologize, I was taking this a little too seriously. I admit that I was a little annoyed when seeing you posted Mormonism doctrine here. But after calming down, I overreacted anyway, and I'm sorry. This forum is mainly for NIMH-related discussions, like Simon said, not a church. And I wanna tell you that if you ever want to post religious discussion entries again, well, be my guest. But I won't join, for me there's nothing to discuss, everything is written in the Scripture, and there's nothing new under the sun. And what needs to be done has been done.

Best wishes!

As long as you respect the beliefs of others (not just me), then I see no reason you'd have a problem. In any case, it takes more than a link to some other site to shake me of my own faith. Just keep in mind that this is primarily a place to discuss NIMH; while I don't mind the occasional religious topic, I would prefer most of the conversation regarding religious themes take place elsewhere, if it doesn't have anything to do with NIMH. If any topic gets out of hand (not just religious ones) I will lock the thread.

As for the topic at hand, I'm of the opinion that there is likely something of animals that is eternal, be it a soul or whatever. But again, as I stated before, that's just my personal opinion and isn't a doctrine of the LDS church, which has remained silent on the issue officially.

That's some cool artwork. Maybe you'd like to have it posted in the Fan Art Gallery?

Well,I'm sorry, Simon. I was like totally overreacting. When discussing religious issues, I do have an uncanny ability to piss everyone off who has different point of view on faith from mine.

As for the Fan Art Gallery, there are so many wonderful artists and pictures there, I mean, do I have the honor? I draw pictures only by using mouse in the PhotoShop. I don't know how to draw by pencils or brushes, and I draw far too slow. This picture took me almost a month to finish, several hours every several days. To tell the truth, I just began to learn drawing in Feb. right after reading MAL's biography[=http://ntfe.thornvalley.com/me.php]MAL's biography. I think it's his words and experience giving me confidence to give it a try, to see if this old dog can still learn new tricks.:) Anyhow, I think I owe him a big thankfulness.

The art is great and on Desert Mouse`s site it`s free, likiddingli as far as my faith I`m reformed Protestant li lots of different blood hereli,
And that I disagree with Simon some things and in fact others may find agreement, We tend to try as we can to understand each other. But animation,,, rock on.. 8)

Thanks, Whiskers57. :) Yes, I was taking it a little too seriously, but that's just what we call fundamentalism. lihugsli

Interesting question. I'm not a relegious type but I'm not athiest either. With that, I would say that if it's living, it has a soul :)

As for the Fan Art Gallery, there are so many wonderful artists and pictures there, I mean, do I have the honor? I draw pictures only by using mouse in the PhotoShop. I don't know how to draw by pencils or brushes, and I draw far too slow. This picture took me almost a month to finish, several hours every several days. To tell the truth, I just began to learn drawing in Feb. right after reading MAL's biography[=http://ntfe.thornvalley.com/me.php]MAL's biography. I think it's his words and experience giving me confidence to give it a try, to see if this old dog can still learn new tricks.:) Anyhow, I think I owe him a big thankfulness.

Hey, that's fine. I've done a couple of pieces using just photoshop, though I'm hoping to get back into drawing a bit... like yourself, it tends to take me a long time to get a piece done. Anyway, if you'd like me to post it, I'd be glad to. Heck, if you do a couple more pics, I'll even create a new album for you.

That's the point. Thus far, the ability or decision of some dog or pig to run into a house beset by fire or gaseous fumes has only showed that they're definitely able to tell when something's wrong and that their owners definitely know to pay attention to their animals. And on that note, it looks exponentially more like blind loyalty rather than reasoning. Humans are rebellious in nature because we're harder to tame; we're more likely to rebel because we're able to perceive better when someone is trying to dupe us. Perception. You can tame humans, too, and then they'd follow blindly, and you probably wouldn't hear people debating whether or not they had souls. Anyway. I'm surprised this is still a living discussion.

Your comment about decision making, got me thinking about a segment on a show called "Daily Planet" which tends to focus on science, nature and technology of the world around us. One of the hosts has a segment called "Jay's Journal" and spoke of dogs, knowing, or at least using calculus in a way that impacts their behavior. In fact, due to the experiment he was commenting on, it seemed the dog in the experiment even made a distinct decision, and changed his plan of attack. It says to me, that dogs, and likely by extension, animals can, and possibly do have a greater level of 'reasoning' and decision making skills. I've included an excerpt from the segments webpage, and a link to the page, which includes a bit more info and a video of the show's segment.

Here's an oddity to add to this week's Jay's Journal, which looks at how dogs seem to use calculus to figure out how much time they should run on the beech before going into the water for a ball their owner has tossed there.

And, here's the link to the page with the video clip & a bit more text: http://snipurl.com/qmrv

--

On a note about the religion talk that has gone on, I personally, was born, and raised a Christian. However, I've grown to become very non-religious. Of course, that doesn't mean I hold it against anyone who is. As the saying goes, "To each, their own." I have somewhat developed my own beliefs, and generally have somewhat adopted more of the Christian ideals when it comes to behavior, and treatment of others. As somewhat of a result, I've grown not to really put a difference on life in general. To me, saying an animal can't have (a) soul/feelings/emotions/thoughts, or are just plain 'inferior' by design etc. is little different than saying 'X' race of people can't have any of the afore mentioned qualities just because they happen to be of 'X' race. On this note, it seems History, is a bit on my side, in this case. Of course, it can still be argued that 'humans and animals are different because of 'X' Reasons.' All I have to say to that, is Humans are still mammals. Deeming ourselves as 'better' or 'superior' in whatever way, seems a bit... egotistical to me. Not that humans have a tendency to toot their own horns ;).

Another thing that come to mind, is that when human kind broke away from the 'primate' lineage, according to some researchers/scientists (from where I don't recall) the 'human animal' as it were, was a total biological fluke, and that the only reason we've grown to be the most 'intelligent' of the 'animals' was that this one fluke stroke of chance of evolution allowed us to evolve as we did. This means, intelligence may not have entirely been exclusive to humans, but rather, we just got lucky. But, I'm sure there are multiple ways to read that 'finding' in relation to one's perception of the matter. ;)

Of course, a fair bit of this is my own thoughts and opinions. Feel free to disregard at your own digression hehe :)

lishakes headli I didn't think there was so much religion here :?

Do animals have souls? Depends what you class as a soul. Do they have the potential to feel both joy and pain just like humans? Yes. Do they therefore have a right to the same respect and others rights as humans? Yes.

Does the bible really say animals don't have souls? That's not rhetorical, I'm asking genuinely. And if it does, well, why believe it?

lishakes headli I didn't think there was so much religion here :?

Do animals have souls? Depends what you class as a soul. Do they have the potential to feel both joy and pain just like humans? Yes. Do they therefore have a right to the same respect and others rights as humans? Yes.

Does the bible really say animals don't have souls? That's not rhetorical, I'm asking genuinely. And if it does, well, why believe it?

Thank you, Tymell.
And of course animals have souls. They can feel the same as humans, can't they? Hell, I get along with animals better than I do a lot of people.
To me the bible is just some fictional nonsense that people take far too seriously. And those of you who follow it and read this, please don't even try and shove your religion down my throat. I'll follow what I believe and choose, and that is not "God" and/or the bible. I am who I am and that is not going to change.

Well, this topic does tend to touch on some very personal beliefs all around, and is one of those things that can lead to touchy situations. I personally believe that no one is trying to /shove/ religion down anyone's throat; they are expressing their personal beliefs. You, of course, are as free to dissagree with their views as they are to express them.

As for the Bible, I've always considered it as something to guide my spirituality by, but I don't consider it the final word on everything. That's not it's purpose, IMHO. It's a book that can give one spiritual and moral guidance and bring one closer to God, and I take it very seriously in that sense--it is, after all, the word of God given through his prophets. Once one tries to use it as an authority for anything outside the realm of human spirituality and morality, IMHO, it doesn't work so well. If the Bible were the last word for every single aspect of existence, the sun would still revolve around the earth. ;) As such, the Bible really doesn't seem to give any definitive answers to me about whether animals have souls, nor do I expect it to, though one can likely interpret it a number of different ways should they choose.

Quite honestly, it's something that doesn't really concern me outside of a mild curiousity. I do think that, regardless of whether they have a soul or not, animals--and all life--should be treated with respect. We depend on them far more than they depend on us, for one. They are also part of God's creation (and please don't interpret this as a blanket statement on my beliefs on Creationism vs. Evolutionism--that's a whole 'nother topic that I do not want to address here, and is even further off topic) and I think that if God created something, he'd expect us to take care of it. Unfortunately, we humans have a somewhat poor record in doing that. :/

In any case, if you feel that the Bible is fictional nonsense, well, there's not much I can do to stop you. Again, all I ask is people to respect each other's beliefs, no matter what your beliefs are.

PS: To anyone who wants to continue this thread, I remind you that treating others with respect is one of the primary rules of this forum; if things get out of hand, I will at my discretion delete posts and/or lock this thread.

We're all [b][u]Mensches[/u][/b][=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckZEdf5iMIk][b][u]Mensches[/u][/b] made by God according to His image, not just apes without fur.

I believe. http://stat.livejournal.com" alt=""/img/mood/opiummmm/foxies/happy.gif

Nope, animals don't have souls. I think it's the truth at least in this universe which God create. People who say that animals do have souls are just anthropomorphizing them, which's a common thing we do to our pets. :wink:

But on the other hand, I don't think that gives us rights to abuse animals.

Why do you think animals don't have souls?

Why do you think animals don't have souls? :?
_____________________________________________________________
-Nimhster 8)

Friends on this site: 10

The answer is very simple - because it's not biblical for me. To be honest, I don't give a rat's butt about whether animals have souls or not. It's insignificant. The true vital thing is the salvation of several menschen here.

Okay, maybe animals have souls, if that makes you happy. :wink:

I think I've already discussed this in detail before, but I feel very strongly about this that all animals most certainly do have souls and spirits. What could possibly make them so different from us that such a question is even relevant? If you believe that human animals have souls, then nonhuman animals certainly do to.

Studies in bioethology reveal that animals are as complex as we are, with intelligence, reasoning, thought and emotions. People think so much less of animals merely because they are ignorant of what they are really like. This is not due to a lack in animal intelligence or sophistication, but a lack in human knowledge and awareness.

People assume that animals must be autonomic and mentally and emotionally void because they cannot talk to us and express to us what they feel or think. Once again, this is due to a lack in human understanding, not in animal mental capacity. Many humans that lack an ability to speak are also often labeled by most to be mentally lacking. Albert Einstein never made a sound until the age of 5, and his worried parents believed for a long time that he must have been mentally retarted.

Evolutionary continuity, which is a rule of evolution that states that complex evolved traits can't suddenly come out of nowhere, is ironically in strong conflict with many of the ideals of the same scientists that so strongly advocate darwinism. This is because many of those scientists are ethically and morally on the exact same grounds as the fundamentalist creationists.

This is the thing that irks me about scientists.
They are so hypocritical, even though all of the educated scientific community supports the idea of all life on earth having evolved over time, which I wholeheartedly agree with as well, they seem to not support the logical rule of evolutionary continuity, which states that all animals that evolved a particular trait couldn't have suddenly gained it out of nowhere, but developed it over time from pre-existing similar traits in other related organisms. This applies as well to everything about humans. As much as scientists mock and denigrate the fundamentalist creationists, both of them seem to still stand together and agree perfectly on the anthropocentric worldview putting humans on pedestal and drawing a thick line between us an all other life on earth. We have superintelligence, emotions, feeling, creativity, everything that makes us human, and according to both their groups, despite their proclaimed differences in rationality, they agree on setting all other animals, even our closest relatives, as inferior, incomplete beings lacking in all of our capabilities.
Our incredible mental abilities, apparently, came out of nowhere.

This is of course unsupported by actual science and logic, and recent research by bioethologists has proven the logic that's existed all along of evolutionary continuity existing between human intelligence and emotion and what exists in other species. We didn't get our traits from nothing, Most animals have forms of higher thinking we don't normally assume they have and a full range of emotions and feelings. Our higher intelligence, thought processes and emotion are all derived from the same forms of thinking and emotion that exists in many of our mammal cousins.

Animals are, like us, complex beings. So if you believe in the spiritual supernatural existence of an eternal entity as a soul inhabiting every complex sentient emotional person, it is only logical to assume that this must be found in our relatives as well.