- Mar 5, 2004
- 17,332
- 6,425
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Just hope that chicken you ate for lunch is in a forgiving mood when you get the heaven!
Upvote
0
If you're a Christian and/or you believe the words of the gospel of John, is there a grammatical or any other reason to assert John 1:29 only applies to humans?
Mmmm.. chicken..
It's really no shocker that the secular world loves the newest Pope. He's sinking the Catholic Church!
More like he's turning it into something God might actually not mind. You know, an institution built on the teachings of Jesus and not legalism, power, elitism, and corruption?
Being built on Jesus is something radically different than what the pope keeps proposing.
I'm glad he's not my spokesperson.
What has he proposed that is radically different than Jesus' teachings?
Except he never actually said those things.Oh, the fact that you don't have to believe in God, the fact that non-believers can be good without God, the idea that we shouldn't tell sinners they're sinning...
Except he never actually said those things.
Ok, but what you wrote is wrong. Read the interpretations of his statements. He never said atheists go to Heaven without accepting Jesus. He was speaking of redemption and good works, not Salvation.He did, but this isn't the thread to debate it.
I stand by what I wrote.
It would be kind of odd to have animals in Eden but not in the New Heaven would it not?I get that he was being "comforting" to this little boy, but we can't say with certainty if pets/animals will be in heaven or not. It's a nice thought, sure, but it's on the shelf next to the "heaven just got another angel" thought process.
Ok, but what you wrote is wrong. Read the interpretations of his statements. He never said atheists go to Heaven without accepting Jesus. He was speaking of redemption and good works, not Salvation.
It would be kind of odd to have animals in Eden but not in the New Heaven would it not?
A response to whether animals go to heaven based on if they posses a soul or not?Does anyone else have a response for this assertion?
A response to whether animals go to heaven based on if they posses a soul or not?
Oh yeah... I have a response to that but I doubt you'd like to hear it.
I can't believe adult human beings would seriously debate whether animals go to heaven or not. But then again, I can't believe any adult would seriously believe in heaven.
The assertion that the idea of animals not having souls is a product of "fanatical conservatism". I can't see what one has to do with the other.
Do you have anything to back up this claim? I've heard various people throughout my life express a belief that pets don't go to heaven, but no one that I'd call "fanatically conservative".
Does anyone else have a response for this assertion?
A response to whether animals go to heaven based on if they posses a soul or not?
Oh yeah... I have a response to that but I doubt you'd like to hear it.
I can't believe adult human beings would seriously debate whether animals go to heaven or not. But then again, I can't believe any adult would seriously believe in heaven.
As to what is meant by an animal having a soul I am not sure if we can say that in the same way humans have a soul. Animals for all their beauty are not made in Gods image.