A rather negative piece I posted at Amazon in 2011. I repost it here mostly for archive reasons. The book under attack was "Animals, Immortal Beings" by Mary Buddemeyer-Porter.
The author or rather compiler of this little book is a
Christian evangelical (and creationist) who believes that animals have souls
and individual immortality. She attempts to prove this by the usual evangelical
methods: try to squeeze as much as possible from individual Hebrew and Greek
words in the Bible, using whatever concordance comes handy.
She doesn't succeed.
There is no evidence that the ancient Hebrews believed in the individual immortality of Fido, Spot or Bunny. And why should there be? The ancient Hebrews arguably didn't even believe in the immortality of humans!
The Pentateuch doesn't seem to mention any kind of immortality at all (except in the case of Enoch), while the First Book of Samuel seems to imply that all human souls go to a place similar in character to the Greek Hades. The first explicit mention of a resurrection doesn't come until the Book of Daniel, a rather late scripture according to modern criticism. The author's take on Ecclestiastes is particularly weak, since this scripture suggests that both humans and animals die and remain dead. Of course, Ecclestiastes could be read as an implicit criticism of such pessimistic views, but at least on this point, it's compatible with the older Hebrew position.
Large portions of this booklet consist of lengthy excerpts from books of others writers, including Martin Luther, John Paul II, John Wesley and John Calvin. The only writer which explicitly says that individual animals dying today will enter the new creation, is John Wesley. Luther is at best agnostic on the issue, while Calvin and John Paul doesn't even discuss it. Please note that the author wants to prove the *individual* mortality of concrete animals alive today, more specifically people's pet dogs or cats. This is a different proposition from the idea that there will be peaceful lions and cute lambs in the millennium, since God might have created these de novo. It's also a different proposition from the idea that animals might have rights, something they could have even if they lack an immortal soul.
In sum, I can only conclude that there isn't Biblical evidence for the author's proposition. Where the idea of pet immortality really comes from, I don't know. Some British churchmen seem to have entertained it, and the idea can also be found in some Spiritualist books. Perhaps the idea as it looks today in the United States doesn't have a clear origin, except in the grief of individual Christian pet owners. Since I'm not a Christian, I couldn't care less whether animal immortality is Biblical or not, but few disinterested observers would consider the Bible to be a "Green" book preaching animal rights.
Even apart from this, "Animals, Immortal Beings" is badly written and edited. I'm sorry, but I have to give it one star...
She doesn't succeed.
There is no evidence that the ancient Hebrews believed in the individual immortality of Fido, Spot or Bunny. And why should there be? The ancient Hebrews arguably didn't even believe in the immortality of humans!
The Pentateuch doesn't seem to mention any kind of immortality at all (except in the case of Enoch), while the First Book of Samuel seems to imply that all human souls go to a place similar in character to the Greek Hades. The first explicit mention of a resurrection doesn't come until the Book of Daniel, a rather late scripture according to modern criticism. The author's take on Ecclestiastes is particularly weak, since this scripture suggests that both humans and animals die and remain dead. Of course, Ecclestiastes could be read as an implicit criticism of such pessimistic views, but at least on this point, it's compatible with the older Hebrew position.
Large portions of this booklet consist of lengthy excerpts from books of others writers, including Martin Luther, John Paul II, John Wesley and John Calvin. The only writer which explicitly says that individual animals dying today will enter the new creation, is John Wesley. Luther is at best agnostic on the issue, while Calvin and John Paul doesn't even discuss it. Please note that the author wants to prove the *individual* mortality of concrete animals alive today, more specifically people's pet dogs or cats. This is a different proposition from the idea that there will be peaceful lions and cute lambs in the millennium, since God might have created these de novo. It's also a different proposition from the idea that animals might have rights, something they could have even if they lack an immortal soul.
In sum, I can only conclude that there isn't Biblical evidence for the author's proposition. Where the idea of pet immortality really comes from, I don't know. Some British churchmen seem to have entertained it, and the idea can also be found in some Spiritualist books. Perhaps the idea as it looks today in the United States doesn't have a clear origin, except in the grief of individual Christian pet owners. Since I'm not a Christian, I couldn't care less whether animal immortality is Biblical or not, but few disinterested observers would consider the Bible to be a "Green" book preaching animal rights.
Even apart from this, "Animals, Immortal Beings" is badly written and edited. I'm sorry, but I have to give it one star...
No comments:
Post a Comment