Part Twenty-Five: More Scholars Who Believe in Animal
Resurrection
In part twenty-four, we looked at several well-known theologians and
scholars who believed in the likelihood of animal resurrection. In this
article, we’ll look at two more.
Richard Bauckham
In his book The Bible and Ecology, this British scholar and theologian made tantalizing statements
that implied animal resurrection. For example he wrote, “If the new creation is
the transformation of the whole of this material creation so that all creatures
may share in the life of the divine eternity, then Jesus’ resurrection must
lead the way to new creation for the whole community of creation, not just
humans.” (171) In order to get clarification, I emailed professor Bauckham and
asked this question: “What’s your belief (and why) on whether or not pets and
other animals alive today will be in the new heaven and earth?” Bauckham
replied, “I take seriously that the new creation is the new creation of all
things. So plants too and rivers and mountains! God will take everything of
value into the new creation. Redeemed from all evil and suffering.”
C.S. Lewis
This brilliant and gifted scholar is unarguably the most widely
read and admired Christian apologists in the twentieth century. Apparently,
Lewis shared the same concern for the eternal destiny of pets as do many other
people. But in his case, he provided a somewhat different—but no less
thought-provoking—answer to the issue. In his typical lucid style, Lewis
suggested that pets, and perhaps “higher” animals, will experience resurrection and eternal
life.
Lewis begins by correctly pointing
out that any conclusion about the eternal fate of animals is necessarily
speculative because God didn’t (or wouldn’t) give us that information: “If
animals were, in fact, immortal, it is unlikely, from what we discern of God’s
methods in the revelation, that he would have revealed this truth.” Lewis
limits his discussion on animal resurrection to the higher animals, in
particular what he refers to as “tame” animals (e.g. pets). He recognized that
they possess “real, though doubtless rudimentary, self-hood . . . and
specifically in those we tame . . . [thus] their destiny demands a somewhat
deeper consideration” [than less sentient animals]. (All Lewis quotes from The Problem of Pain, chapter 9.)
Lewis’ explanation for possible
animal resurrection lies in their interconnectedness with people: “The beasts
are to be understood only in their relation to man and, through man, to God.”
Mankind, Lewis continues, “was appointed by God to have dominion over the
beasts, and everything a man does to an animal is either a lawful exercise, or
a sacrilegious abuse, of an authority by divine right.” Thus, “in so far as the
tame animal has a real self or personality, it owes this almost entirety to its
master. If a good sheepdog seems ‘almost human’ that is because a good shepherd
has made it so.”
Here’s how this plays out in terms
of animal resurrection. Lewis argued that just as people are “in” Christ, so
tame animals “attain a real self…in
their masters. . . . And in this way it seems to me possible that certain
animals may have an immortality, not in themselves, but in the immortality of
their masters.” Moreover, “If any [wild animals]. . . should live again, their
immortality would also be related to man—not . . . to individual masters, but
to humanity.”
In short, Lewis believed human
resurrection would encompass at least “tame” animals’ resurrection because
their eternal destiny coexists with the people who loved and cared for them.
Although Lewis kept his focus primarily on the resurrection of tame animals, he
allowed that wild animals might also resurrect to inhabit the redeemed new
earth.
A Crucial Clarification
Now, let’s pause a moment. I want
to be careful no one misunderstands what I’m saying before I begin to
systematically lay out my arguments for animal resurrection. When I (or any of
the theologians and scholars I’ve quoted) suggest that animals will be
resurrected and dwell with saved humans
in Heaven, I’m not suggesting there is no fundamental difference between humans
and animals. Only humans are created in God’s image (Gen. 1:26-27), and we are
of far greater value to God than animals (Matt. 12:12; Luke 12: 7, 24). The
Bible teaches that people are the pinnacle of God’s creation (Ps. 8:4-6), and
we enjoy an exalted position in creation (Matt. 6:26; 10:31; 12:11-12). That
animals will be resurrected does not elevate them to the value of humans in
God’s eyes, not on this earth nor in the age to come. But it doesn’t follow from this that animals can’t
be resurrected. They can. Animals will be resurrected because they are included
in creation’s redemption from the curse. There’s nothing to fear about this. We
don’t have to worry that animal resurrection somehow compromises mankind’s
value to God or elevates animals to human status. That would be unbiblical!
Now that you see I’m in good company with others who believe in animal
resurrection—and people much smarter than I am—I can begin to systematically
lay out the arguments for animal resurrection. I’ll begin this next week.
* The blog articles in this series are adapted
from copyrighted material and may not be
reproduced in book or article form, either electronically or in print, without
my written permission. But feel free to send links to these articles, with a
brief introduction, to your personal email list, Facebook friends and groups,
or other people who may enjoy them. Or post a link on your own website. If you
would like to be added to my personal blog email list (people who
receive an email notice whenever I post a new blog article), contact me through
my website: www.danstory.net.
No comments:
Post a Comment