# Do we have to forgive animals?



## QueenEsther (Sep 20, 2009)

I hope this is in the right section..

Last night we came home to one less chicken, our neighbors dog had gotten our rooster (or at least I'm pretty sure he was a rooster). Right now my husband would like to use the dog in place of a clay pigeon. 

So I know we should forgive our neighbors for letting their dog roam around freely but do we have to forgive their dog too?


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 20, 2009)

You should forgive your neighbor... but the dog was just being a dog.

Was your chicken roaming free or was it secured? If it was roaming free, I don't see any reason why you would think your animal can be free while your neighbor has to keep their's locked up, and that would be what you get for letting a prey animal wander freely when there are predator animals in the vicinity. If, however, it was secured but yet the dog actually tore up a gate or a fence to get to it, and if you can PROVE it was their dog... I wouldn't be afraid to ask them to make it right.


----------



## toddpedlar (Sep 20, 2009)

No, I don't believe you need to "forgive" the neighbor's dog. It's not human.

What you do have, though, is an offense by your neighbors. They should restore your rooster, and I would not feel ashamed about asking them to do so.


----------



## QueenEsther (Sep 20, 2009)

Our chicken was wandering freely in a fenced vinyard. Their dog dug under the fence to get to them.


----------



## toddpedlar (Sep 20, 2009)

Then you should feel no guilt about asking that your rooster be restored to you. They are responsible for their dog's actions.


----------



## OPC'n (Sep 20, 2009)

The dog was just taking what he naturally thought belonged to him......just like you take from the chicken what you think naturally belongs to you. For you to think that you should have to forgive or hold a grudge against a dog which does what it does naturally, would be for you to think that God needs to either forgive you or hold contempt against you for taking from the chicken it's eggs since all things belong to Him anyway. Animals do what God has instilled within them to do as a natural instinct to live just as He has put that within mankind. You think you own the chickens bc you bought them with your money. The dog thinks he owns the chicken bc he won them through hunting. Looks like the dog won....


----------



## jwithnell (Sep 20, 2009)

I think a big "bad doggie!" is in order here!

Seriously, a dog's a dog. The neighbor is responsible. That said, doesn't the "ox known to gore" principle come into play here -- i.e., if the neighbor knows this dog roams free and takes down neighbors animals, then he holds some responsibility. If this is a totally new behavior, then it's a problem if it happens again?

That said, a chicken-killing dog ain't going to be rehabilitated.


----------



## Skyler (Sep 20, 2009)

If you're holding a grudge against the dog, then you need to ask God for his forgiveness. The dog won't be offended, but holding a grudge is still wrong. 

I don't think I'd ask for restitution unless I was unable to replace the chicken myself. Sure, it's within my rights, but in general I think I'd stick up for my rights if it would benefit someone else(or promote the Gospel).


----------



## bookslover (Sep 20, 2009)

QueenEsther said:


> I hope this is in the right section..
> 
> Last night we came home to one less chicken, our neighbors dog had gotten our rooster (or at least I'm pretty sure he was a rooster). Right now my husband would like to use the dog in place of a clay pigeon.
> 
> So I know we should forgive our neighbors for letting their dog roam around freely but do we have to forgive their dog too?



You _are_ kidding, right?


----------



## Montanablue (Sep 20, 2009)

Skyler said:


> If you're holding a grudge against the dog, then you need to ask God for his forgiveness. The dog won't be offended, but holding a grudge is still wrong.
> 
> I don't think I'd ask for restitution unless I was unable to replace the chicken myself. Sure, it's within my rights, but in general I think I'd stick up for my rights if it would benefit someone else(or promote the Gospel).



I don't entirely disagree (although some chickens can actually be pretty valuable, so I certainly don't think its _wrong_ to ask for restitution) but I do think the dog's owners should know that their animal is killing chickens - just so they can take measures to make sure it doesn't happen again. 

As to the original question, no, for all the reasons given above. Also, as someone else said, the dog didn't do anything wrong - he was just being a dog. Its his owners who are to blame for not keeping him on leash or fenced in a yard.


----------



## Mushroom (Sep 21, 2009)

Dogs aren't volitional beings, so forgiveness doesn't apply.

But any farmer knows that the only cure for a chicken-dog is a lead pill administered at high velocity.


----------



## Blue Tick (Sep 21, 2009)

Brad said:


> Dogs aren't volitional beings, so forgiveness doesn't apply.
> 
> But any farmer knows that the only cure for a chicken-dog is a lead pill administered at high velocity.



I agree with Brad on this one.


----------



## Knoxienne (Sep 21, 2009)

Forgiveness is a forensic, legal transaction between God and His people and people and their neighbor/s. We don't make covenants or contracts with animals.


----------



## charliejunfan (Sep 21, 2009)

What!?!


----------



## Albatross (Sep 21, 2009)

Skyler said:


> If you're holding a grudge against the dog, then you need to ask God for his forgiveness. The dog won't be offended, but holding a grudge is still wrong.



Is holding grudges against animals a common occurrence? If so, can you explain why this requires forgiveness from God?


----------



## Montanablue (Sep 21, 2009)

Brad said:


> Dogs aren't volitional beings, so forgiveness doesn't apply.
> 
> But any farmer knows that the only cure for a chicken-dog is a lead pill administered at high velocity.



I would definitely contact the owners and check with the local police before taking this step. Even here in ranch country, its can be illegal (not to mention a little cruel) to shoot a dog.


----------



## Mushroom (Sep 21, 2009)

Montanablue said:


> Brad said:
> 
> 
> > Dogs aren't volitional beings, so forgiveness doesn't apply.
> ...


Actually, in most rural settings that I have inhabited, it would be expected of the owner himself to administer the medication. At least if he wanted maintain amicable relations with his neighbors. An influx of PETA-member city escapees may change that in any given locale.


----------



## Sven (Sep 21, 2009)

"So I know we should forgive our neighbors for letting their dog roam around freely but do we have to forgive their dog too?"

Only if you are United Methodist.


----------



## Christusregnat (Sep 21, 2009)

QueenEsther said:


> I hope this is in the right section..
> 
> Last night we came home to one less chicken, our neighbors dog had gotten our rooster (or at least I'm pretty sure he was a rooster). Right now my husband would like to use the dog in place of a clay pigeon.
> 
> So I know we should forgive our neighbors for letting their dog roam around freely but do we have to forgive their dog too?



Rose,

Here are some thoughts on animals:

Exodus 21:28-29
If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit. But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.

Although dealing with a life-and-death judgment, the lesser judgments follow the same principal: people are responsible for their animals. If they did not restrain their dog, they must make restitution. If the dog is a repeat offender, the penalty is even more severe. 

Therefore, they ought to make restitution. Also, demanding restitution and forgiveness of the animal's owner are not contrary.

Cheers,


----------

