"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth"...and it's not a pretty site! Are they the lucky ones? The reason that I try not to ascribe biblical knowledge to environmental situations is that it taints all efforts towards improvement. It's too fatalistic. The Bible could be compared to the soma of Brave New World.

What, you mean religion is the opiate of the masses?

Perhaps it's the way the masses approach religion that turns religion into an opiate . . .

As to fatalism, while it is true there are passages that seem to be fatalistic, there are also passages that are clear calls to action. To say that the Bible is against (or even discourages) improvement is an interpretation at variance with my reading.

As far as the implication that the earth isn't much to look at: I would love to inherit Yosemite, or Sequoia, or the Carolina coasts, or the Pacific Northwest, or the Maine coast, or western Colorado. It depends on where you look. There is still much unspoiled beauty. Shouldn't we try to preserve what we can in a balanced way?


[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 01-14-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 01-14-2003).]

Mr. Dark: good reminder! I guess the glimmer of hope RB offers even in the most stygian of tales is what has kept my interest in his writings over the years. My perspectives have changed from decade to decade, but still there is hope. We can never give up hope. Who will come to our aid if we do!?

"Hope" - (the last element remaining when Pandora released the pestilences) is key to what makes us human. "Faith" gives our spirit purpose and direction. "Charity" allows us to share our gifts with others. So, now what?

RE: Our natural treasures! I live within minutes of the 6 mil. acre "forever wild" Adrirondack Mts. Park, 1/2 hr. from the mighty St. Lawrence R. which reaches from northern NY onward 1000 mi. to the Gaspie Peninsula (Que). Forests, rivers, and miles of open fields are what make up most of our immediate surroundings. Seasons change drastically 4 times a year. (Today "literally" -15F, 3' of fresh snow in the past week! Spring will eventually return all greened, flowered, and in flight. Summer will be hot. Then autumn in the mountains and hills will arrive more brilliant than any picture you have ever seen!) Priceless!

No man made this! Truthfully, each of us has "already" inherited the earth. We are here now! Our responsibility? Appreciate it, experience it, and tend to it!

Forgetting this would bring about that brave new world we now consider.


[This message has been edited by fjpalumbo (edited 01-15-2003).]

I couldn't agree more! A hearty AMEN!

Nature humbles us, awes us. Ours is a heaven on earth.

I don't know if there are any worms left in this particular can I have held... so I'll try shaking it ...one more time...and see...

"I notice Ray hardly ever talks about pets, except cats...of which he has had many.... Now, do pets, or any animals for that matter, have any notion of God? Or is that a people thing?

"And, does anyone know of any other animals Ray has written about? Or are people always his forte?"

[This message has been edited by Nard Kordell (edited 01-15-2003).]

Well, he writes about dinosaurs (they were animals, right?).

As to whether cats and other animals have any notions about God . . . Do they have notions about anything?

The dictionary defines 'notion' as "belief, opinion, a mental image or representation, a fanciful notion, a whim" (Also like nik-nak type items, but that seems irrelevant to the question at hand.)

If animals had notions about God, but could not communicate those notions to us, we'd have no way of verifying the existence of such notions.

Do animals form mental images? Or do they essentially just live in a world driven by their senses? That is, they're hungry, so they seek food. For me, when I'm hungry, I often visualize (and sloppily drool) as I think about food. Do animals form mental images, or notions, about simple things like food?

The question that is often associated with this kind of thinking is the speculation on whether or not animals have souls. Building on that thread, just the other night, at dinner, the question came up as to whether or not a clone would have a soul. If the soul is what animates the body, and we eventually successfully clone a human, will that "animated" human, by definition, have a soul? And if so, it seems that it would have had to have been implanted by God. To say otherwise is to say that man can generate a soul (this seems to border on heretical) or that the soul is simply something necessarily associated with a body. Would a living clone challenge God's sovereignty in the area of what constitutes a living human being?

Nard, you and your worms. Did Bradbury write any stories involving clones?

closest is marrionettes inc. but they were robots/androids.

A dog's notion of God comes up in "The Courage of Lassie," a wartime propaganda picture mostly a waste except for several redeeming points: a young Elizabeth Taylor blossoming into her most beautiful phase, and two really great speeches by Frank Morgan (whom you all know and love as the Wonderful Wizard of Oz). In one speech, he explains to the young girl man's notions of God, "but a dog has his God with him all the time"--meaning the human he most looks up to. (By the same token, probably cats consider themselves the gods of their chosen humans and bestow benevolence or disapproval accordingly on their humble servants.) The other speech deals with programming/deprogramming from an environment of aggression and comes near the end of the movie, which is worthwhile for these three things.

Oh, I wanted to sneak this into the postings somewhere, so here's an opportunity...

I have to take time and look it up in Scripture, but it says ....that animals had a will, (yep, a will)...and did not want to be made subject to the sin of man, but against their will did so...and now groan, waiting with all of creation, for the curse of man's sin to be lifted off all creation.... Wow! It's there...I'll look it up later tonight or tomorrow and post it. Do animals go to heaven. Well, they were in the Garden....

Mr. Dark:

Gosh o' Golly!

Dinosaurs!! I Forgot. 'The Fog Horn',

'The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms', etc.

Then there is Ray's autobiography..
'The Dogs Eat Sweet Grass.'

The topic of clones and animals having souls is another compelling issue hinged on dynamics of spirituality.

I support the premise that the soul exists to guide the mind, which in turn, directs the body. History and the daily headlines proves that not everyone listens to their inner voice guiding their minds and bodies, thus enabling free will to reck havoc on our lives.

Cloned humans could very well be void of a soul since a creation of man. It is feasible that animals being a creation of God, have more soul than a cloned human.

I am a cat lover and feel that my grey Russian is my feline soulmate. He can detect my moods without a spoken word. He comforts me when sad and summons me when I need a break from writing too long. When I'm sick with the flue, he will gently crawl into my lap to warm my body. He never does that! And once when I felt a dark presence invading my airspace during a profoundly spiritual writing session, he jumped on my back from behind as if to scare the entity away.

Then there is Ray's autobiography..
'The Dogs Eat Sweet Grass.'

Does anyone know if this is available anywhere? In print? Old? Recent? I've not heard of it!

P.S. If a cat has a soul, I'm presuming a dinosaur has a soul, right?

"Cel":
Boy, that's a dicey topic/premise for discussion, "Cloned humans could very well be void of a soul since a creation of man. It is feasible that animals being a creation of God, have more soul than a cloned human."

It evokes thoughts from the Isle of Dr. Moreau. HGW

RB view: "Why would you clone people when you can go to bed with them and make a baby? C'mon, it's stupid." (Salon Magazine, 2001)

And as for animals with special senses and cares for their closest human, how about the ultra-eerie "The Emissary"? Wow.

This whole thread has been driving me nuts.

>>Cloned humans could very well be void of a soul since a creation of man. It is feasible that animals being a creation of God, have more soul than a cloned human.

How can there be "degrees" of a soul? More soul? Less soul? Really. If my clone has no soul, can I treat "it" like an animal? Enslave it? Exterminate it? Doesn't this kind of "thinking" lead to slavery and genocide?

There are plenty of people who have "clones" or genetically identical duplicates. They are called TWINS. Which twin has a soul? Do they have to share one soul between them?

Clones are a creation of "man"? So is everyone else--it's just cruder technology, and it feels nicer too. What about artificial insemination? Do you get a soul if you were shot out of a turkey baster? Do test tube babies get a soul?

What about those who are born with birth defects? Did God create imperfect beings? Perhaps they don't have a soul. Yes, that explains it. . .

Sorry to go on the attack here. I would just rather treat people in terms of their humanity--I don't care what receptacle you were created in. Let's respect life for life's sake.