Biblical Perspective On Animal Rescue Decisions
The biblical perspective on animal rescue decisions is not explicitly outlined as a systematic doctrine, but various passages and interpretations offer guidance on the value and treatment of animals. Scripture indicates that God preserves both humans and animals [3], and there are instances where animals are seen as having inherent value or being objects of divine concern.
In the Old Testament, animals are frequently mentioned in contexts of property, labor, and sacrifice. Livestock and other animals were considered valuable possessions [1, 5]. The law even shows consideration for animals, as seen in Exodus 22:30, which is interpreted by some scholars as God being considerate of animals [10]. Shepherds were expected to protect their flocks from wild beasts [6], and Jacob bore the loss of animals torn by predators [4]. The Psalms call to "rescue the weak and needy" [2], a principle that can be extended to vulnerable creatures.
Rabbinic tradition, as seen in the Babylonian Talmud, discusses the sanctity and value of animals, particularly in sacrificial contexts. Some rabbis held that animals, even disqualified ones, should be redeemed rather than left to die, suggesting an inherent sanctity beyond their immediate use [7, 8, 14, 15]. This contrasts with views that their sanctity is solely a function of their monetary value [7, 8]. The Mishnah also indicates that animals involved in certain transgressions were subject to judgment alongside humans, highlighting a unique legal consideration for them [11].
New Testament passages, such as Luke 13:15-16, illustrate Jesus's concern for animals. In this passage, Jesus points out the hypocrisy of religious leaders who would untie their animals on the Sabbath to water them, yet refuse to heal a human being. This highlights the common practice of caring for animals, even on the Sabbath, to protect one's investment [9].
While animals are valued, biblical theology generally distinguishes between the salvation of humans and animals. Charles Hodge, one theologian, argues that Christ came to save humans, not angels or irrational animals, based on the general teaching of Scripture [12]. However, early Christian writers like Tertullian and Origen debated the nature of animals and their relationship to God, with some refuting the idea that irrational animals were more beloved by God than humans [16]. Hippolytus noted that "whatever was ordained by God is clean and purified by the very authority of His creation," suggesting a fundamental goodness in all creatures [13].
Sources
- Genesis “Won’t their livestock and their possessions and all their animals be ours? Only let us give our consent to them, and they will dwell with us.” -- Genesis 34:23”
- Psalms “Rescue the weak and needy. Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.” -- Psalms 82:4”
- Psalms “Your righteousness is like the mountains of God. Your judgments are like a great deep. Yahweh, you preserve man and animal. -- Psalms 36:6”
- Genesis “That which was torn of animals, I didn’t bring to you. I bore its loss. Of my hand you required it, whether stolen by day or stolen by night. -- Genesis 31:39”
- Easton's Bible Dictionary “Easton's Bible Dictionary: Beast — This word is used of flocks or herds of grazing animals (Ex. 22:5; Num. 20:4, 8, 11; Ps. 78:48); of beasts of burden (Gen. 45:17); of eatable beasts (Prov. 9:2); and of swift beasts or dromedaries (Isa. 60:6). In the New Testament it is used of a domestic animal as property (Rev. 18:13); as used for food (1 Cor. 15:39), for service (Luke 10:34; Acts 23:24), and for sacrifice (Acts 7:42). When used in contradistinction to man (Ps. 36:6), it denotes a brute creature generally, and when in contradistinction to creeping things (Lev. 11:2-7; 27:26), a four-footed ”
- Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Lamb, The — The young of the flock -- Ex 12:5; Eze 45:15. Described as Patient. -- Isa 53:7. Playful. -- Ps 114:4,6. Exposed to danger from wild beasts -- 1Sa 17:34. The shepherd's care for -- Isa 40:11. Used for Food. -- De 32:14; 2Sa 12:4. Clothing. -- Pr 27:26. Sacrifice. -- 1Ch 29:21; 2Ch 29:32. Considered a great delicacy -- Am 6:4. Offered in sacrifice Males. -- Ex 12:5. Females. -- Nu 6:14. While sucking. -- 1Sa 7:9. At a year old. -- Ex 12:5; Nu 6:14. From the earliest times. -- Ge 4:4; 22:7,8. Every morning and evening. -- Ex 29:38,39; Nu 28:3,4. At the pass”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Meilah 44a.38:11: But the Rabbis say: The animals should be redeemed. Since Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi maintains the animals may not be redeemed, this indicates that they have inherent sanctity, and therefore they are subject to repeated misuse. By contrast, the first tanna , like the Rabbis, holds that their sanctity is a function of their value, and consequently they are not subject to repeated misuse.”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Meilah 44b.38:11: But the Rabbis say: The animals should be redeemed. Since Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi maintains the animals may not be redeemed, this indicates that they have inherent sanctity, and therefore they are subject to repeated misuse. By contrast, the first tanna , like the Rabbis, holds that their sanctity is a function of their value, and consequently they are not subject to repeated misuse.”
- Luke (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Luke 13:15: 13:15-16 You hypocrites! The religious leaders would take care of their own animals on the Sabbath (to protect their investment) but then refuse to meet the needs of a fellow human being. In an ironic wordplay, the same word is translated untie (13:15) and released (13:16). The religious leaders would free their animals but not a daughter of Abraham—one of God’s chosen people and a recipient of his favor. • in bondage by Satan: Jesus’ exorcisms and healings manifested the Kingdom of God and the defeat of Satan (see 11:20).”
- Exodus (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Exodus 22:30: 22:30 God is considerate even of animals (see Jon 4:11).”
- Mishnah (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Mishnah, Mishnah Sanhedrin 1:4: Cases of capital law are judged by twenty-three judges. An animal that copulated with a person and an animal that was the object of bestiality are judged by twenty-three judges, as it is stated: “And if a woman approaches any animal to lie with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal” (Leviticus 20:16), and it states: “And if a man lies with an animal, he shall be put to death and you shall kill the animal” (Leviticus 20:15). In cases of bestiality, the verse juxtaposes the execution of the animal to the execution of the person, and therefore the case of the”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 107: these passages as teaching the salvation of all men, if by all in this connection we must understand all human beings. But why limit the word to all men? Why not include angels and even irrational creatures? The answer is, because the Bible teaches that Christ came to save men, and neither angels nor irrational animals. This is only saying that all must be limited to the objects of redemption. Who they are is to be learned not from these general terms, but from the general teaching of Scripture. The all who are to he united in one harmon”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 5: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian — CHAP. III. ARGUMENT.--AND THUS UNCLEAN ANIMALS ARE NOT TO BE REPROACHED, LEST THE REPROACH BE THROWN UPON THEIR AUTHOR; BUT WHEN AN IRRATIONAL ANIMAL IS REJECTED ON ANY ACCOUNT, IT IS RATHER THAT THAT (part 1): How far, then, must that law, which--as I have shown by the authority of the apostle--is spiritual, be spiritually received in order that the 647 divine and sure idea of the law may be carried out? Firstly, we must believe that whatever was ordained by God is clean and purified by the very authority of His creation; neither must it be re”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 64b.5: Rav could have said to you: I did not state my opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. I stated my opinion in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. Rabbi Yehuda holds that disqualified animals are permanently rejected and communal sin-offerings may be left to die. The Rabbis disagree with both issues and hold that disqualified animals are not permanently disqualified, and communal sin-offerings that are disqualified are not left to die, but rather graze until they develop a blemish, and then are sold. Rav, who holds that the remaining goat fr”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 176a.128:5: Rav could have said to you: I did not state my opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. I stated my opinion in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. Rabbi Yehuda holds that disqualified animals are permanently rejected and communal sin-offerings may be left to die. The Rabbis disagree with both issues and hold that disqualified animals are not permanently disqualified, and communal sin-offerings that are disqualified are not left to die, but rather graze until they develop a blemish, and then are sold. Rav, who holds that the remaining go”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. XCVII. (part 1): How impious, indeed, is the assertion of this man, who charges us with impiety, that "not only are the irrational animals wiser than the human race, but that they are more beloved by God (than they)!" And who would not be repelled (by horror) from paying any attention to a man who declared that a serpent, and a fox, and a wolf, and an eagle, and a hawk, were more beloved by God than the human race? For it follows from his maintaining such a position, that if these animals be more beloved by God than human bein”