Soul Possession

Frankly, I’m not one for the Campingpalooza pile ons. This isn’t to take anything away from pointing out the gravity of false prophecy. But I can’t help but think it’s giving high profile quackery a little more attention than it deserves and perhaps not giving most people’s common sense enough credit when it simply turns away. Even so, and I realize it’s a tad late, but the reality of the atheist sponsored “Post Rapture Pet Care” is irresistible, not only for the good natured humor but also to help make the two kingdoms point that in addition to levity even atheists have the capacity of a caring soul.

But speaking of who has and who has not a soul, here is a Christian perspective for those of us on the one hand not at all convinced that our beloved pets have souls but on the other fully persuaded they are much more than mere beasts.

This entry was posted in Humor, Pets, Rapture. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Soul Possession

  1. RubeRad says:

    DGH’s article fails to address the fundamental and self-evident datum that cats are evil. Or at least they operate according to a strict covenant of works, in which their owners (read: slaves) must perform great and continuous acts of service, sacrifice, and worship, before the cat will grant their favor. Dogs come much closer to displaying God’s love, in that, while we are yet complete strangers to them, yet they show their love for us in this, that they wag their tails and sniff our crotches.

    Joking aside, old-earth-creationist Hugh Ross allows for a category of “soulish” animals, such as horse, dog, cat, monkey, etc., with varying capacity for intelligence, personality, loyalty, service, etc. The runners-up in the help-meet competition, but in the end no match for she who was taken out of man.

  2. RubeRad says:

    Question though: were pre-lapsarian animals immortal?

    I agree with what I hear from Kline, that the answer is no. A lion’s fangs were not meant for eating grass, and pork chops taste gooood, and bacon tastes gooood.

    But I wonder what that means for animals in the New Creation? How literal is the marriage supper of the lamb? Will glorified bodies (not being subject to decay) even require food for energy?

  3. Zrim says:

    I agree with Paul that no eye has seen, no ear has heard and no mind has conceived what God has prepared. I tend to use that in reverse when retro-speculating on what fangs were for, though it is plainly revealed that bacon is good.

  4. RubeRad says:

    I mean, even Vincent Vega knew that, and I’m pretty sure he was not regenerate. (Julius on the other hand, may have been undergoing some holy ghost conviction, on the path towards grief and hatred of his sin…)

  5. dgh says:

    Rube, are you taking a page from the Bayly’s — you demonize cats, they demonize feminists?

  6. RubeRad says:

    Those dang cats — they demonized me first!

  7. Chris Sherman says:

    It is appointed unto cats to die 10 times then stay in purrrcatory.

  8. dgh says:

    Chris, may you come down with cat dander allergies and inherit 3 long hairs from your in-laws.

  9. RubeRad says:

    You mean three long-haired cats? Because if it’s just three long hairs, he could just throw those away.

  10. Chris Sherman says:

    Whoa, that was prophetic- (or was it just an impreCATory prayer?) I just discovered last week that I am allergic to cat dander. Keeping an eye out in case the 3 long hair hippy cats show up.

  11. Chris Sherman says:

    Could throw the cats away too, but I’m a Christian now.

  12. RubeRad says:

    Love it! That’s PURRRfect (sorry to re[ab]use the pun…)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s