Does this passage, Genesis 1:26, really mean christians can do what they want to animals?
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”
I would understand if there was a clause clarifying “for food, clothing and as beasts of burden” but as there is no such clarification one must presume that our dominion over animals extends to using them for our amusement as race horses, bull-fighting, cock-fighting, dog-fighting, pets, etcetera.
Christians are permitted to think there is nothing at all wrong with brutally injuring and killing animals as entertainment, that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with animal abuse. If they do, they obviously don’t understand god’s intent as written in their silly little life instruction manual. Does this mean there are no christians in P.E.T.A.? Of course not. But surely choosing to care for animals if it’s not what god intended is disagreeing with god. I was under the impression disagreeing with god was a bad thing…
Those who claim the bible is the basis of all laws must therefore be prepared to acquit Michael Vick of all dog-fighting and dog killing charges or give up on that moronic notion forever.
Another post by EvilGod, one of the Unindoctrinated.
notapundit, full of churchy-bullshit. Ghenesis 1 and 2 are out of order when man was created; they claim the earth came first, then liht, then the sun. The Hibirijt word nepesh means both soul and life (literally huffer), and assigns one for any animal (as does Latin) as well. Lastly your Lord took away marriage: http://google.com/groups?q=%22it+is+not+good+to+marry%22. Not only must you giv up your cash and goods, but your wife, household, and life if you want salvation.
Your Scripture has thousands of mistakes.
Eternity isn’t permanent—learn the Latin. (Nor is ever or aiwo—they’re all cognates, betterthangod, so they mean the same.)
a person != they
it’s -> its
a millennia -> a millennium
Dominion in KJV is usually rule in translations, which both Ghen 1:26 and 1:28 say. But 1:28 also says subdue—that is, beslave—the earth. This “bless”ing must be why fundamentalists are outspoken against environmentalists.
notapundit:
http://google.com/groups?q=Autymn+-autumn+Jesus
http://google.com/groups?q=%22JFG+vs.+Scripture%22
Hi Autymn D.C.
I’m not at all certain what point you were intending to make in your comment but you certainly failed spectacularly as all of your corrections were wholly incorrect.
Eternity, according to the dictionary is: “infinite time; duration without beginning or end.” which is as I meant it.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Eternity
I’m not sure what it is you are referring to when you wrote “a person != they”. If you are referring to my use of “one” refer here.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/one Reference 19.
If you are referring to my use of “they” nowhere in my post do I use “they” to refer to a single person.
The only “it’s” in my post is a contraction of “it is” therefore the apostrophe is required.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/it%27s
A millennia according to the dictionary is:
“a period of 1000 years.”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/millennia
All these are as I was taught them.
You poor deluded fool. I spent way too long responding to your other comment to waste my time on such easily discounted rubbish.
Like our souls is hope is also eternal. The hope to meet our eteranl Creator is something to be cherished.
My friend pj since you obviously enjoy reading Wordsworth here is another of his sonnets.
Ecclesiastical Sonnets
XX
Baptism
Dear be the Church, that, watching o’er the needs
Of Infancy, provides a timely shower
Whose virtue changes to a christian Flower
A Growth from sinful Nature’s bed of weeds!–
Fitliest beneath the sacred roof proceeds
The ministration; while parental Love
Looks on, and Grace descendeth from above
As the high service pledges now, now pleads.
There, should vain thoughts outspread their wings and fly
To meet the coming hours of festal mirth,
The tombs–which hear and answer that brief cry,
The Infant’s notice of his second birth–
Recall the wandering Soul to sympathy
With what man hopes from Heaven, yet fears from Earth.
Yes many fear death and upon that death we shall return to the earth. But while the death of a family member of a Christian brings mourning and sorrow, there is also hope in the promises of Christ which brings comfort to those who mourn – the hope of everlasting life in God the Father.
You have now supposedly shaken off the shackles of hope and I feel pity for you. Your hopelessness it seems only makes you skeptical and cynical.
Tell me what questions do you have that go unanswered?
if only our patriarchal fairy tales had arks sinking and wild nature prevailing.
but no, men had to write colourful stories, enforce them as god’s truth, spoon feed them to impressionable kids…
of course, some of those kids escape the pathological hopefulness of religion, born instead to be forever ‘question-ready’.
for those who remain forever ‘rapture-ready’ the apocalypse will no doubt be a self-fulfilling prophecy, only without the transcendence of born-agains to meet their father. they’ll compost the soil with the rest of us and no doubt give new life to a less violent non-human future.
*/*
~
There are many important truths found in Genesis Chapters 1 and 2. One of those truths not being that humans can abuse animals. If you seek to bait Christians then please bait with something that isn’t childish. I am sure you are above this level.
One of the many truths in Genesis Chapters 1 and 2 is that there was order to creation and that order came from God. Another truth is that God created man and woman and breathed a soul into them thus making man and woman a “living soul” and thus distinguishing them from animals that have no souls. Dominion over the earth and animals comes with certain responsibilities, one of them being the care of the earth and animals, not the abuse of the earth and animals. Another truth is that God places humans as stewards of the earth to continue and further God’s creation. Another truth is that mankind is made in the image and likeness of God. And finally the one truth that I know you will like, God ordained the institution of marriage when God created man and woman and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply.
@ brendannewlon
Excellent work. You did exactly as I expected a believer would do. I know it was a little sneaky of me but it’s always fun to bait the deluded.
The first thing you did was point out, quite correctly, that the bible has mis-translations in it. Clearly you have now agreed that it has flaws. If there are flaws, which any idiot can find in a couple of minutes on-line, the bible can be wrong. If anything is in doubt, everything is in doubt.
One must presume that no church has ever found an error in translation in the last sixteen hundred years or that they are aware of the errors but will not correct them. Obviously it is the latter. Every part of the bible that came from ancient Greek that has the word “forever” in it is wrong as there was no word in ancient Greek for forever the mis-translated word was Aeon. No scholar will tell you this means forever as it doesn’t. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of these errors so why hasn’t it been fixed?
There is almost no chance a corrected Bible will ever exist for many reasons, here are just a couple. 1, and the most important one, is that it would demonstrate quite clearly that there are mistakes, falsehoods and blatant lies in a supposedly sacred, holy, inspired by god itself, instruction book for humanity. Any doubt is too much doubt. How would you feel if some passage of the bible that you had always held dearly turned out to be the opposite of what was originally written because the person who translated that bit of Dead-Sea scroll was missing a few words on a ripped off corner and guessed incorrectly as to what words went there. It would shake your faith in the entire book as it should.
2. The varying cults and sects of Christianity, Judaism and Islam would want some input as to what was corrected, which books to leave in, which ones to leave out, maybe make up some new ones. You were aware some were just made up weren’t you?
Oh, and actually Dominion means control over, so it does include the right to do anything to them. There are more rules on how you are to treat your slaves than there are on how you are to treat animals. Hmm? Is that a good thing or a bad thing I wonder?
Like every other question about religion the answer is incredibly easy. All God has to do is tell us.
And in reference to your “1 in 5 ” statement. you’re kidding right. Where did you get that gem from, P.E.T.A.?
As always. Your religion is based on a book. The book has many easily found fundamental errors. Your religion, your entire faith is based on a collection of myths, fables, lies and mistakes. Your religion, like all others, is wrong, unnecessary and harmful and it’s about time humanity outgrew its need for superstition.
[…] A response to: “God grants the right to abuse animals” Posted on June 28, 2009 by brendannewlon A response to: God grants the right to abuse animals. [Link] […]
In the previous comment I should have been more explicit about the implication of what I was saying.
We need to know what the original word is in Hebrew, because the translation “dominion” in English doesn’t make clear to us what it implies humans should do. I think the work is probably more properly translated as “caretaker” (lets look it up? somebody help?).
I know that in the Islamic tradition, there’s a similar notion, but the expression is explicit that it means “caretaker,” so that humans have responsibilities toward animals, and animals have rights and can’t be abused, overburdened, or killed without cause. Even when killing animals for meat, it has to be done in a very particular sanitary and painless way (by hand, leaving no room for the machine errors that leave 1 in 5 machine-slaughtered animals alive and badly injured).
If you have misunderstood the meaning of the verse, you may actually be in agreement with the sentiment being expressed, and accidentally making a baseless and unjust accusation. And if you get a reputation for making weak or uninformed accusations, you would no longer be an effective communicator. Just call up a local church or synagogue and ask to speak to someone with a proper religious education about the matter. Or email a professor who teaches classes on bible studies or Judaism. Get an answer to this, so that this issue of whether or not “God grants the right to abuse animals” can be settled and we can move on to other topics. I would greatly appreciate if you would post their comments or your own in reply below.
Finding out the truth is better than risking mistakenly making false allegations.
*copying this reply to my blog:
http://brendannewlon1fiction.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/a-response-to-god-grants-the-right-to-abuse-animals/
Actually you should look to the Hebrew word there translated as “dominion”. I wouldn’t be surprised if it means something more like “caretaker”.
Anyway, at that point in Genesis, people weren’t permitted to even eat meat. I’m not going to go look it up, but doesn’t one of the next lines say something to the effect of “plants for your sustenance”…? can’t remember.
But it wasn’t until after the flood that humans were permitted to eat meat… Genesis 4:x when God promises never again to destroy the whole earth by flooding and sets up the Bow as a sign of his contract.
Also, we’ve got some generally atheist-religious dialog going on over at my blog, and you were favorably mentioned to me by one of the respondents, so I wanted to invite you to come join the discussion if you’re interested.
http://brendannewlon1fiction.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/a-response-to-tough-questions-can-god-do-evil/
thanks!
i saw a tee-shirt yesterday that said something like: “i don’t mind god, it’s his fan club i can’t stand”.
my ex-partner’s dad is a minister in the anglican church. i was often perplexed when he displayed hatred for a friend’s dog or would boast about the time he threw a knife at a brown snake and, by divine intervention (no doubt), speared it to the ground. Apparently the snake was livid and uncontrollable until he dropped a rock on it so he could safely retrieve his knife.
he’s been a missionary in asia for 30 years, but the ubiquitous snake story is really a continuation of his colonisation of indigenous life here in Oz.
the spread of christian-capitalism and its cruelty is really a monstrous wall to dismantle if we are to find a way of living a non-hierarchical co-existence with non-human nature.