Carnivores

A young friend has asked a question which may interest others. His question and my suggested answer follows. Other answers are possible and it would be interesting to learn what readers think.

Question

Putting together Genesis 1:30, “to every beast of the earth…I have given every green herb for meat” and 9:3, “Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things,” some commentators suggest all animals prior to the deluge were herbivorous. Isaiah 11:6-8 would then mean’ that this process will be reversed in the kingdom. The weakness in this approach is that carnivorous animals, such as the wolf, lion and leopard, are designed to hunt and eat their prey. They would no longer be the same animals if they became herbivorous. Yet if these passages do not mean as suggested, what do they mean?

A valid question

This is a very real problem which must have been as obvious to thoughtful people in the days of Moses and Isaiah as it is today. The large, strong sharp claws of the lion are obviously designed for catching animals and ripping them open. Its large and powerful jaws, lined with sharp teeth, are ideally suited to tearing off and breaking down raw meat but they would be quite incapable of cropping grass. The mouth and teeth of the ox, which are clearly designed for grazing, are built to an entirely different plan.

Internally, too, the lion and the ox are totally different. The lion has a digestive tract somewhat like ours which digests meat beautifully but is quite unable to digest grass. The ox, by contrast, has multiple stomachs and a marvelous system for chewing the cud. By such means, it easily digests grass but cannot cope at all with meat. This, then, is the nub of the problem.

Tanks cannot be used to harvest grain

A blacksmith could literally beat a sword blade into a plowshare. But no blacksmith could possibly beat a complicated machine such as a tank into another complicated machine such as a harvester. That would necessitate melting down the tank for scrap and starting all over again to build the harvesting machine.

Yet a lion is just as much a complex killing machine as a tank, and an ox is as complicated a device for reaping and processing vegetation as is a combine harvester. Consequently, to say, “In the kingdom, lions will literally eat straw” is rather like saying that, in those days, tanks will be used to reap and thresh corn. Maybe they will, but not without being completely redesigned and rebuilt.

A literal interpretation has difficulties

There are two possibilities about Isaiah 11:6-8: Either it is literal or, like many passages in the prophets, it is poetical and figurative. If it is literal, then lions (and thousands of other carnivorous species) will be totally transformed when Christ comes: different feet, jaws, teeth and insides.

And if we also put a literal interpretation on Genesis 1:30 and view 9:3 as a reversal of 1:30, then a similar transformation, but in the opposite direction (that is, from herbivores to carnivores) must have taken place in Noah’s days.

All this is possible, but it seems unlikely. A vegetarian lion would be such a different animal from the one we know that it seems hardly reasonable to use the old name, “lion.” If Isaiah intended us to take him literally, then what he really meant was evidently, “The lion shall be transformed into a straw-eating creature, more like an ox than a lion.” Even such a view of Isaiah’s words can hardly be taken as entirely literal.

Pre-flood fossils of carnivores

Another problem is the evidence of fossils. Whatever one’s view of geology may be, all are agreed that fossils are the remains of creatures that lived before the flood. And fossils of carnivorous animals, such as Tyrannosaurus Rex, are legion. Thus carnivores lived before the flood.

Evil during the millennium

Still another difficulty with the literal interpretation is this. The fact of mortality, which includes suffering and death, will not be completely removed until the very end of the millennium. Scripture is quite adamant about this. The last “enemy” Christ will destroy is death at which point he will turn the kingdom back to his Father. God will be “all in all” and only then will evil and suffering have finally disappeared (I Cor. 15:25-27).

Carnivorous behavior, and the consequent suffering and death of animals, is undoubtedly one of the evils that must be eliminated, but indications are that this enemy will be one of the last to go. We read that some animals will be “torn” by other animals in those days (Ezek. 44:31). Moreover, it would seem that man will himself remain carnivorous during the millennium. The resurrected Christ ate fish and if, as many of us believe, the passages about animal sacrifices in the kingdom are to be taken literally, then they settle the matter. The flesh of those sacrifices is to be cooked (Zech. 14:21; Ezek. 46:24) and eaten (Ezek. 44:29-31) by mankind.

It would be strange if God were to change all the lower animals into herbivores while leaving man as the one and only carnivore.

Figurative language more likely

In view of the difficulties attending a literal view of Isaiah 11:6-8, we should reasonably consider approaching the words as being figurative. Lions are often used in scripture to represent fierce human beings or fierce nations (e.g. Isa. 5:29; 30:6, etc.). Various other dangerous animals, especially the wolf, leopard and serpent, are also used figuratively in numerous passages.

Therefore, it is quite possible that Isaiah 11:6-8 is a poetical way of saying that all mankind will be peaceable in the kingdom. Nations that formerly behaved like lions and wolves will then behave like oxen and lambs. It is interesting to note that there was a partial fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy in the first century when Christ sent out his followers “as lambs among wolves” (Luke 10:3) and they returned unharmed.

Green herbs for meat

Although it is reasonable to interpret Isaiah 11 as figurative, this approach will not do in Genesis 1. While no doubt having a secondary prophetic message, the whole chapter obviously has a literal basis. What, then, are we to make of the statement, “To every beast of the earth…I have given every green herb for meat” (v. 30)?

The most likely explanation is really quite simple. Underlying those words is one of the most profound facts about nature: There is a fundamental difference between the animal and vegetable kingdoms.

The basic difference does not lie in the possession of consciousness since many lowly members of the animal kingdom have no brains. Mobility is not the key difference either as many members of the vegetable kingdom have no roots but travel around on the surface of seas and lakes. The essential difference is a far more fundamental one.

All living things require a constant supply of energy which they acquire in one of two entirely different ways. Some derive their energy wholly or mainly from sunlight — these we call plants. The rest derive their energy from eating and digesting organic matter — these (apart from fungi) are all classified as animals.

Plants are energy source for all animals

Because of this difference, it would be quite possible to have a world without animals. So long as there is sunlight, plants can live and grow without any help from animals. But it would be impossible to have a world with animals and no plants because there would then be no way for the animals to obtain energy. It was not just an arbitrary decision by God to create the vegetable kingdom on the third day and the animal kingdom on the fifth and sixth days. The plants had to come first so that there would be an energy supply for the animals when they arrived.

Of course, only herbivorous animals obtain their energy directly from plants. The carnivores obtain it indirectly by eating other animals. But this does not alter the fact that the first link in the food chain is always the vegetable kingdom. Without plants, every animal in existence would soon starve to death.

In a very real and ultimate sense, every kind of animal depends upon an energy supply that comes from the eating of plants. Genesis 1:30 thus expresses a profound truth in but a few words.

As for Genesis 9:3, this merely tells us that Noah and his family were now given permission to eat meat if they wished. It tells us nothing at all about the eating habits of animals. Therefore, it does not state that carnivorous animals began to exist at that time.