• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

abrahamism vs paganism on human nature as seperate from animals

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
An important distinction is that nowhere in the bible (I am fairly certain..) does a man ever change into an actual animal, or have a spirit related to an animal, on the contrary he his noted to be hierarchically above all the animals. In most other mythology that I have read, this idea of animals being consubstantial with man does occur, and frequently I believe. In this fact, I think there is an argument to be made that God made an ontological mistake if he expected to make humans into humbler creatures, that by setting him apart as more worthy than the swarms of sparrows or net-fulls of fish it was only to elevate the human pride he often detested.

In Irish mythology I noticed that the first man was able to change into fish and birds and that this was actually associated with wisdom. And the deities of course were often associated with the animals as well, changing into all kinds of animals and various elements in nature. Merlin escapes his high role in society to live in the forest and contemplate nature, I think reflecting a pretension toward non-abrahamic ontology quite strongly. The point is that in this kind of ontology, it seems that we are animals, and that has important implications. Rather than seeing the fish as an object that you merely kill and eat, you might perceive a spirit in a fish or bird that was just as good as yours if not better.
 
Last edited:

Nimos

Well-Known Member
An important distinction is that nowhere in the bible (I am fairly certain..) does a man ever change into an actual animal, or have a spirit related to an animal, on the contrary he his noted to be hierarchically above all the animals. In most other mythology that I have read, this idea of animals being consubstantial with man does occur, and frequently I believe. In this fact, I think there is an argument to be made that God made an ontological mistake if he expected to make humans into humbler creatures, that by setting him apart as more worthy than the swarms of sparrows or net-fulls of fish it was only to elevate the human pride he often detested.

In Irish mythology I noticed that the first man was able to change into fish and birds and that this was actually associated with wisdom. And the deities of course were often associated with the animals as well, changing into all kinds of animals and various elements in nature. Merlin escapes his high role in society to live in the forest and contemplate nature, I think reflecting a pretension toward non-abrahamic ontology quite strongly. The point is that in this kind of ontology, it seems that we are animals, and that's an important distinction. Rather than seeing the fish as an object that you merely kill and eat, you might perceive a spirit in a fish or bird that was just as good as yours if not better.
I think it would have been good if the bible had pushed forward such message, that animals were spirit creatures or whatever. It would probably have helped treating them slightly better in the long run, than we are treating them now.

Don't know if you have seen this documentary? (It is not for the faint-hearted, it is pretty much all captured with hidden cameras. So now you are warned!!) But none the less, I think it ought to be a mandatory documentary to show school children, to teach them how to respect animals.


Earthlings (2005)
 
Last edited:

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Yes, that is one of the most glaring differences between the animistic worldview and the Abrahamic one, although Islam does slightly better by not being as anthropocentric as Christianity.
 
Last edited:

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
I think it would have been good if the bible had pushed forward such message, that animals were spirit creatures or whatever. It would probably have helped treating them slightly better in the long run, than we are treating them now.

Don't know if you have seen this documentary? (It is not for the faint-hearted, it is pretty much all captured with hidden cameras. So now you are warned!!) But none the less, I think it ought to a mandatory documentary to show school children, to teach them how to respect animals.


Earthlings (2005)
I wouldn't show that to school children as it depicts highly graphic torture and abuse of animals, which can be traumatizing. I actually recall a time in school, where a student showed a video about fur farms and it showed the minks being skinned alive. Even our teacher, who was a vegan animal rights activist, couldn't stomach it and stood in the hall during it. I don't think pushing ideological veganism is the right way to go, either. But we should teach children to respect all life, regardless of if they eat meat or not. That said, I mostly agree with you.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't show that to school children as it depicts highly graphic torture and abuse of animals, which can be traumatizing. I actually recall a time in school, where a student showed a video about fur farms and it showed the minks being skinned alive. Even our teacher, who was a vegan animal rights activist, couldn't stomach it and stood in the hall during it. I don't think pushing ideological veganism is the right way to go, either. But we should teach children to respect all life, regardless of if they eat meat or not. That said, I mostly agree with you.
Im not talking about showing it to 5 year olds :D But to teach people that these things happens, that animals do not live like in cartoons. Besides that I don't think it pushes forward an ideology of veganism. I have watched it and still eat meat, but I think its important to inform people that they should demand that animals are treated better, while they live. That Earth is not humans playground to do with as they please. I fully agree that these can be very emotional experiences, but we shouldn't hide reality. If these things happens people ought to know, so we can change them for the better.

Things are already looking really bad according to scientists, so if people keep living in an illusion that animals are cute and things will be fine. That is far worse than the truth.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity:
It's frightening but true: Our planet is now in the midst of its sixth mass extinction of plants and animals — the sixth wave of extinctions in the past half-billion years. We're currently experiencing the worst spate of species die-offs since the loss of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Although extinction is a natural phenomenon, it occurs at a natural “background” rate of about one to five species per year. Scientists estimate we're now losing species at up to 1,000 times the background rate, with literally dozens going extinct every day [1]. It could be a scary future indeed, with as many as 30 to 50 percent of all species possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century [2].

AMPHIBIANS
No group of animals has a higher rate of endangerment than amphibians. Scientists estimate that a third or more of all the roughly 6,300 known species of amphibians are at risk of extinction [6]. The current amphibian extinction rate may range from 25,039 to 45,474 times the background extinction rate [7].

BIRDS
A 2009 report on the state of birds in the United States found that 251 (31 percent) of the 800 species in the country are of conservation concern [8]. Globally, BirdLife International estimates that 12 percent of known 9,865 bird species are now considered threatened, with 192 species, or 2 percent, facing an “extremely high risk” of extinction in the wild — two more species than in 2008. Habitat loss and degradation have caused most of the bird declines, but the impacts of invasive species and capture by collectors play a big role, too.

FISH
Across the globe, 1,851 species of fish — 21 percent of all fish species evaluated — were deemed at risk of extinction by the IUCN in 2010, including more than a third of sharks and rays.

INVERTEBRATES
Invertebrates, from butterflies to mollusks to earthworms to corals, are vastly diverse — and though no one knows just how many invertebrate species exist, they're estimated to account for about 97 percent of the total species of animals on Earth [10]. Of the 1.3 million known invertebrate species, the IUCN has evaluated about 9,526 species, with about 30 percent of the species evaluated at risk of extinction.

MAMMALS
Perhaps one of the most striking elements of the present extinction crisis is the fact that the majority of our closest relatives — the primates — are severely endangered. About 90 percent of primates — the group that contains monkeys, lemurs, lorids, galagos, tarsiers, and apes (as well as humans) — live in tropical forests, which are fast disappearing. The IUCN estimates that almost 50 percent of the world's primate species are at risk of extinction.

PLANTS
Through photosynthesis, plants provide the oxygen we breathe and the food we eat and are thus the foundation of most life on Earth. They're also the source of a majority of medicines in use today. Of the more than 300,000 known species of plants, the IUCN has evaluated only 12,914 species, finding that about 68 percent of evaluated plant species are threatened with extinction.

REPTILES
Globally, 21 percent of the total evaluated reptiles in the world are deemed endangered or vulnerable to extinction by the IUCN


The Extinction Crisis
 

leov

Well-Known Member
An important distinction is that nowhere in the bible (I am fairly certain..) does a man ever change into an actual animal, or have a spirit related to an animal, on the contrary he his noted to be hierarchically above all the animals. In most other mythology that I have read, this idea of animals being consubstantial with man does occur, and frequently I believe. In this fact, I think there is an argument to be made that God made an ontological mistake if he expected to make humans into humbler creatures, that by setting him apart as more worthy than the swarms of sparrows or net-fulls of fish it was only to elevate the human pride he often detested.

In Irish mythology I noticed that the first man was able to change into fish and birds and that this was actually associated with wisdom. And the deities of course were often associated with the animals as well, changing into all kinds of animals and various elements in nature. Merlin escapes his high role in society to live in the forest and contemplate nature, I think reflecting a pretension toward non-abrahamic ontology quite strongly. The point is that in this kind of ontology, it seems that we are animals, and that's an important distinction. Rather than seeing the fish as an object that you merely kill and eat, you might perceive a spirit in a fish or bird that was just as good as yours if not better.
In OT humans are given a higher level of consciousness.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Im not talking about showing it to 5 year olds :D But to teach people that these things happens, that animals do not live like in cartoons. Besides that I don't think it pushes forward an ideology of veganism. I have watched it and still eat meat, but I think its important to inform people that they should demand that animals are treated better, while they live. That Earth is not humans playground to do with as they please. I fully agree that these can be very emotional experiences, but we shouldn't hide reality. If these things happens people ought to know, so we can change them for the better.

Things are already looking really bad according to scientists, so if people keep living in an illusion that animals are cute and things will be fine. That is far worse than the truth.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity:
It's frightening but true: Our planet is now in the midst of its sixth mass extinction of plants and animals — the sixth wave of extinctions in the past half-billion years. We're currently experiencing the worst spate of species die-offs since the loss of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Although extinction is a natural phenomenon, it occurs at a natural “background” rate of about one to five species per year. Scientists estimate we're now losing species at up to 1,000 times the background rate, with literally dozens going extinct every day [1]. It could be a scary future indeed, with as many as 30 to 50 percent of all species possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century [2].

AMPHIBIANS
No group of animals has a higher rate of endangerment than amphibians. Scientists estimate that a third or more of all the roughly 6,300 known species of amphibians are at risk of extinction [6]. The current amphibian extinction rate may range from 25,039 to 45,474 times the background extinction rate [7].

BIRDS
A 2009 report on the state of birds in the United States found that 251 (31 percent) of the 800 species in the country are of conservation concern [8]. Globally, BirdLife International estimates that 12 percent of known 9,865 bird species are now considered threatened, with 192 species, or 2 percent, facing an “extremely high risk” of extinction in the wild — two more species than in 2008. Habitat loss and degradation have caused most of the bird declines, but the impacts of invasive species and capture by collectors play a big role, too.

FISH
Across the globe, 1,851 species of fish — 21 percent of all fish species evaluated — were deemed at risk of extinction by the IUCN in 2010, including more than a third of sharks and rays.

INVERTEBRATES
Invertebrates, from butterflies to mollusks to earthworms to corals, are vastly diverse — and though no one knows just how many invertebrate species exist, they're estimated to account for about 97 percent of the total species of animals on Earth [10]. Of the 1.3 million known invertebrate species, the IUCN has evaluated about 9,526 species, with about 30 percent of the species evaluated at risk of extinction.

MAMMALS
Perhaps one of the most striking elements of the present extinction crisis is the fact that the majority of our closest relatives — the primates — are severely endangered. About 90 percent of primates — the group that contains monkeys, lemurs, lorids, galagos, tarsiers, and apes (as well as humans) — live in tropical forests, which are fast disappearing. The IUCN estimates that almost 50 percent of the world's primate species are at risk of extinction.

PLANTS
Through photosynthesis, plants provide the oxygen we breathe and the food we eat and are thus the foundation of most life on Earth. They're also the source of a majority of medicines in use today. Of the more than 300,000 known species of plants, the IUCN has evaluated only 12,914 species, finding that about 68 percent of evaluated plant species are threatened with extinction.

REPTILES
Globally, 21 percent of the total evaluated reptiles in the world are deemed endangered or vulnerable to extinction by the IUCN


The Extinction Crisis
Fair enough. I can't even bring myself to watch Earthlings. I've seen enough footage of people torturing and abusing animals, as well as factory farm footage. I'm still traumatized by that crap.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
Fair enough. I can't even bring myself to watch Earthlings. I've seen enough footage of people torturing and abusing animals, as well as factory farm footage. I'm still traumatized by that crap.
I have to admit that, I have also only watched it one time, that were enough for me to be aware and care about it :)
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
Don't know if you have seen this documentary? (It is not for the faint-hearted, it is pretty much all captured with hidden cameras. So now you are warned!!) But none the less, I think it ought to a mandatory documentary to show school children, to teach them how to respect animals.

Whatever it is, I don't really want nightmares. I've seen enough of that stuff to be plenty enough aware.
 

leov

Well-Known Member
That's just the opinion of the book basically.
What about my own experience? I had pet animal on an off my entire life. Mostly cats and dogs. I found the to have much higher consciousness then I expected but there are limits. On average I would trust a dog before trust a human.
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
I have watched it and still eat meat, but I think its important to inform people that they should demand that animals are treated better, while they live. That Earth is not humans playground to do with as they please. I fully agree that these can be very emotional experiences, but we shouldn't hide reality.

And that's a point that can perhaps tie back to one's religion. I have to look at my notes, but there was a story out of a Canadian Native American tradition about how killing and eating a bear was an extremely solemn act, and there was actual weeping over the deceased animal. And there what I might call certain laws on how one must encounter and harvest it.

I think the tradition that our modern western culture inherited in processing animals for food seems related to Old Testament sacrificial processes. The process was mechanistic, the animal was processed only with a certain beneficial end in mind, and the priest surely didn't weep for the animal. In other cultures, the animal itself was more of an object of contemplation when it came time to eat it, and parts of the animal returned to its spirit (the part you 'sacrifice') was meant to be a show of respect toward the creature directly.
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
What about my own experience? I had pet animal on an off my entire life. Mostly cats and dogs. I found the to have much higher consciousness then I expected but there are limits. On average I would trust a dog before trust a human.

I see, and that sort of relates to my last point that the spirit of an animal may be as good if not better than a man. If most of our 'higher consciousness' seems to result in a pretty visible amount of malice, then you might ask a question like 'is this really higher consciousness?' The Abrahamic tradition never seems to ask that kind of question, it just declares that you have it, and it is something above that of an animal. And so adam is allowed to name the animals, instead of going onto the mountain and allowing the hawk spirit to name him.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
I think the tradition that our modern western culture inherited in processing animals for food seems related to Old Testament sacrificial processes. The process was mechanistic, the animal was processed only with a certain beneficial end in mind, and the priest surely didn't weep for the animal.
Great point. I've never thought of that.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
And that's a point that can perhaps tie back to one's religion. I have to look at my notes, but there was a story out of a Canadian Native American tradition about how killing and eating a bear was an extremely solemn act, and there was actual weeping over the deceased animal. And there what I might call certain laws on how one must encounter and harvest it.

I think the tradition that our modern western culture inherited in processing animals for food seems related to Old Testament sacrificial processes. The process was mechanistic, the animal was processed only with a certain beneficial end in mind, and the priest surely didn't weep for the animal. In other cultures, the animal itself was more of an object of contemplation when it came time to eat it, and parts of the animal returned to its spirit (the part you 'sacrifice') was meant to be a show of respect toward the creature directly.
You have lots of cultures where you would value or respect the death of an animal. Modern day humans, don't really know what it means to kill an animal, even when looking at hunters, fishermen's etc. that kills some, but this is mostly for sport or job etc. For most people, animals means meat you find in the fridge down in the supermarket. But to the ancient people, they could pretty much use all parts of the animals for tools, clothing, food etc. so killing them could really help their chances of surviving. To me I think a lot of it was lost when we started to domesticate them and needed ways to distribute meat and skins quickly and more effective. And today, most humans are as disconnected from nature as they can possible be. And my guess is that, if we imagine that all cities went away and people were thrown out into the woods and had to survive on their own, that close to 70-80% of all humans would be dead within a couple of months from drinking polluted water, eating mushrooms they don't know what is and simply unable to find food. :)

I live in a city and basically the only animals I see are insects, dogs, pigeons, sparrows, crows and cats. And if Im really lucky maybe a
squirrel. I really feel connected to the concrete jungle :)
 
Top