Will we meet our pets in heaven?

The Kansas City Star

Chaplain to pets Jack Vinyardi, with his own pooch, Abby, tries to comfort those who have lost pets. Carolyn Sharp’s beloved greyhound Starr was 4 years old when she was diagnosed with a deadly form of cancer.

Sharp decided the two of them would stay together as long as Starr was not suffering too much. The greyhound received radiation treatments and pain patches for several months until the veterinarian told Sharp it was time to end it.

“When we went in for the last time, I held her in my arms for the comfort of both of us until she had left,” said Sharp, who lives in Overland Park. “I have still not really made peace with losing her so young.”

Eight years later she still doesn’t understand the “why.” But she is certain she’ll hold Starr again — in an afterlife.

con’t @ Kansas City Star


I for one sure hope so. I just lost a beloved pet.


I think so. I haven’t always thought that way. But the Bible is full of references to animals. And if you’ve read any of the things my great-niece Kathryn experienced (read these 4 blogs, although I know a lot more about her experiences than what are recorded here), you will seen some evidence of animals. She mentioned a whale and a dolphin, and in my blog, I relate some other things she told me about her experience, where she mentioned children playing with animals on “the big farm.” These experiences indicate animals in heaven, and I hope - and think - we might meet at least some of our pets there.

I truly hope that I will someday. However, my two favorite pets would be incompatiable-a big dog (95 lbs) and a huge tomcat (15 lbs.). The dog was from my youth and the cat from my adulthood, I couldn’t see them getting along.

I remember an argument that animals, even out pets, have no soul. That arguement could compell one to believe that there is no hereafter for them.

Interesting. I once had a pig named Priccilla. She was a pet until we had a hankering for bacon. I wonder if I will be able to tell her how good she tasted…:coffee_spray:

Seriously though, It would be cool to hang with the pets in the after life, but everything Ive learned from studying human nature and the devine, leads me to believe that “heaven”, is not a viable concept to most people (including myself). It is not a realm of earthly delights, but rather a place for souls, which we know less about than anything. Some people think they will be married in heaven, yet the Bible clearly states otherwise. The natural world is a far cry from the devine. Things that were put on the earth for us to eat and have devinion over, should logically not have an eternal rest.

While I don’t claim to be an expert on the topic of what heaven is or may be like, I do adhere to the following view which makes the concept of describing heaven even more difficult due to our extreme lack of understanding.

To me, a place like heaven is where all the material trappings of life on Earth are the farthest from being relevent. Therefore, any frame of reference that you have in this life will be of no use in the afterlife. Since one may be in it for an eternity, even the reference of time as we know it is useless.

This is why I truly scoff at the promise of 72 virgins in heaven awaiting the terrorist homicide bombers. Why would God provide one a place for carnal pleasures in heaven? Isn’t heaven supposed to be far beyond such things of our physical realm?

Besides, 72 virgins for all eternity isn’t a very good average.

What about the New Earth? Isn’t that part of the final Heaven? The New Jerusalem is, I believe, the “Present Heaven,” (paradise) or at least in it, and when the present earth is destroyed and then renewed, and the Holy City descends from Heaven, and there will be a paradigm merge (I got that term from Dr. David Jeremiah), and Heaven will be much like earth - except it will be perfect. Man was made for an earthly existence, and the Holy City has streets, and gates - all things implying a physical existence. Y’all need to read Randy Alcorn’s book “Heaven.” He makes an excellent case, and uses scripture to back up most of it. Some of it, he admits, is only conjecture, his personal beliefs, but the basic part of it is soundly founded on scripture.

The new earth thing has always confused me. I will make it a point to study it futher, though the was a time that I had it explained to me, and of course it was so long ago, I forgot. You raise an interesting point Susanna, and I will educate myself about this.:eusa_think:

There are many things I thought about heaven in years gone by that I have discarded, although I have nearly always felt that it would be a physical place. Jesus said he would “prepare a place for us;” disembodied spirits don’t need a “place.”

I’m not entirely sure about the new earth - as to whether it will be an altogether new earth, or a renewed earth. One of the arguments against its being a new earth would be that God had to admit failure with the old earth. On the other hand, Peter talks about the destruction of the earth when “the elements will melt with fervent heat.” But the Bible also talks about God destroying the earth with a flood, and yet it is the same earth that Noah eventually touched land on again as the one he left. The cleansing by fire could be a means of destroying all destructive bacteria, etc, just as the flood probably released and spread them.

Kathryn’s visits to heaven have also been an eye-opener; if they were contrary to the Bible, I would have to question their reality, but they don’t seem to contradict any solid truths in the Bible. And the Bible, after all, doesn’t tell us everything about Heaven.

There has really been relatively little written or preached about Heaven; many Christians have taken the platonic view that the body is evil, and the spirit must be freed from it. But God made the body as well as the spirit, and as the spirit is renewed by salvation, in many ways the body is also renewed. The whole man is affected. In Genesis, we see that man doesn’t exist until he has both a body and a soul/spirit (some people use those 2 terms interchangably, others consider them as separate).

I believe the Bible teaches that at the resurrection of the dead we will resume our original bodies, but they will be perfected (what else can resurrection mean than that the dead lives again)?

I kinda lean toward the idea that our new bodies won’t need blood - when Jesus appeared to his disciples after the resurrection of the dead, he says, " a spirit hath not flesh and bone as ye see me have." Notice he did not say flesh and blood. Elsewhere (I Corinthians 15:50) it says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.” I had come to that thought on my own, and Dr. Jeremiah, in the same sermon I mentioned earlier, said the same thing.

I doubt we will see our pets in Heaven as they dont have souls…

There are animals in heaven, the Bible clearly indicates that. So why couldn’t he resurrect some of our pets - not, of course, in the way that we will be resurrected.

I agree with Sir William. My cat Roadkill is destined for a meeting with tires and oblivion.

However, I believe you are probably right about the new earth bit, animals and such, whether the new earth is completely rebuilt or just a remodel.

i hope so too,