And God saw that it was good

  • Thread starter Thread starter JFJK
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JFJK

Guest
In Genesis we read several times: “And God saw that it was good”. Many things in the creation don’t appear good to me. For example: parasites, viruses, tsunami, forest fires. It’s also not crash-proof, humans already have the nuclear arsenal capable of wiping-out all life on Earth.

How to understand “good” in the biblical account:
  1. Not perfect but “good enough”
  2. Good in the sense “beautiful”, “nice”, “esthetic”, but also fragile.
  3. Good in God’s point of view doesn’t always mean good in human’s point of view
  4. It was good originally but it gradually became corrupt
  5. It was good but it suddenly became bad as a consequence of original sin (I heard this explanation from some christians)
  6. It is a moral appeal. If God saw it was good, than it means that any human who respects God must also respect the creation and always protect the environment.
What is the Catholic interpretation of “And God saw it was good?” All of the above?
 
This is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

God creates an ordered and good world

299 Because God creates through wisdom, his creation is ordered: "You have arranged all things by measure and number and weight."151 The universe, created in and by the eternal Word, the “image of the invisible God”, is destined for and addressed to man, himself created in the “image of God” and called to a personal relationship with God.152 Our human understanding, which shares in the light of the divine intellect, can understand what God tells us by means of his creation, though not without great effort and only in a spirit of humility and respect before the Creator and his work.153 Because creation comes forth from God’s goodness, it shares in that goodness - "And God saw that it was good. . . very good"154- for God willed creation as a gift addressed to man, an inheritance destined for and entrusted to him. On many occasions the Church has had to defend the goodness of creation, including that of the physical world.155

151 Wis 11:20.
152 Col 1:15, Gen 1:26.
153 Cf. Ps 19:2-5; Job 42:3.
154 Gen 1:4,10,12,18,21,31.
155 Cf. DS 286; 455-463; 800; 1333; 3002.
 
Tertullian makes a good point that things were created good, but change has happened

Out of Matter, evil though it be—nay, very evil—good things have been created, nay, “very good” ones: “And God saw that they were good, and God blessed them” Genesis 1:21-22 —because, of course, of their very great goodness; certainly not because they were evil, or very evil. Change is therefore admissible in Matter; and this being the case, it has lost its condition of eternity; in short, its beauty is decayed in death. [Against Hermagenes 12]
 
St. Thomas Aquinas makes a great point here

Corporeal creatures according to their nature are good, though this good is not universal, but partial and limited, the consequence of which is a certain opposition of contrary qualities, though each quality is good in itself. To those, however, who estimate things, not by the nature thereof, but by the good they themselves can derive therefrom, everything which is harmful to themselves seems simply evil. For they do not reflect that what is in some way injurious to one person, to another is beneficial, and that even to themselves the same thing may be evil in some respects, but good in others. And this could not be, if bodies were essentially evil and harmful.
 
The LORD God said: “It is not good for the man to be alone.” (Genesis 2:18)

-Tim-
 
God is the I Am. God is love. God is good.

Because God is the I Am - God is existence. God is love, and God is also good (this is an understatement but you get the point). Matter is therefore good in nature because it exists - but like all things God’s perfect mercy has allowed it to be corrupted.

Free will is a :eek: sometimes.

edit: not saying I would have it any other way, don’t be deceived. I am just looking to show the reality of it.
 
This reminds me of an inspiring line from an old movie about St. Maria Goretti. She teaches little children that God did everything good, and a child replies: “big ants too? No, those are bad!!” and she looks at him without replying anything :o

Truth is that everything God created was not just good, but very good. All negativity entered the world after (a) the rebellion of the angels and (b) the rebellion of men. All evil we see is the work of the hands of creatures, and none of it is the work of God, who is infinitely good, or, rather, the fullness of all goodness, and as such cannot do what is contrary to goodness.

Remember the words of Christ:
Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion?
Click to expand...
Our Father only gives us what is good. Sometimes - actually, always :o - our thoughts are not His thoughts, but in the end “there is nothing hidden that shall not be revealed” and we will finally understand.
 
JFJK said:
In Genesis we read several times: “And God saw that it was good”. Many things in the creation don’t appear good to me. For example: parasites, viruses, tsunami, forest fires. It’s also not crash-proof, humans already have the nuclear arsenal capable of wiping-out all life on Earth.

How to understand “good” in the biblical account:
  1. Not perfect but “good enough”
  2. Good in the sense “beautiful”, “nice”, “esthetic”, but also fragile.
  3. Good in God’s point of view doesn’t always mean good in human’s point of view
  4. It was good originally but it gradually became corrupt
  5. It was good but it suddenly became bad as a consequence of original sin (I heard this explanation from some christians)
  6. It is a moral appeal. If God saw it was good, than it means that any human who respects God must also respect the creation and always protect the environment.
What is the Catholic interpretation of “And God saw it was good?” All of the above?
Click to expand...
What you consider parasites might have an important and hidden (to you) function in the ecosystem, same as viruses, did you know that HIV originally came from monkyes?

Some say illness is the result of the original sin, it could be a valid point.
Tsunamis are the result of plate tectonics a natural process of the earth.
Would we humans be subjected to their effects had we not sinned in the garden?
Forest fires also serve a purpose in the ecosystem ask any botanist, they renew the forest most are the result of nature.
Except when a man made one occurs then we can surely attribute that to sin.

The last is nuclear bombs, this fall under the cathegory of good vs evil and free will.

From the beginning of human history no pre history man has found the way to use tools for good and or evil.

Take the bow and arrow, what was it’s primary function?
Hunting, procuring food however was also used to make war I would wager they also did the same with sticks and stones, after all Cain killed Abel with a Stone!

Soo was it all good? God has not given up on us, I am not about to second guess Him.
I marvel at all the beauty that the universe provides us, He is there and I particularly find God in the little breeze cooling my cheeks on a hot summer afternoon, I close my eyes and thank Him for caressing me.
 
R_C that reminds me of when I was about 8 years old. I told my mom I didn’t think it was fair that dogs had to hold their heads up at that angle like that all day every day (my neck hurt at the time in my defense). I claimed God was being unfair to the dogs!! haha let’s just say she didn’t like that.
 
Allow me to relate something I heard from I think Fr, Mitch Pacwa. I think this relates to your question. It will be loosely based on what he said because I dont have a photographic memory.

It starts out simply with the question why does God make tigers when they eat other animals? Isn’t God permitting an act of evil by allowing tigers to eat other animals? If a tiger eats a deer it is an act of evil to the deer. However, the question is, is a tiger a good thing? I mean isn’t a tiger a most beautiful and wonderful creature? Its not to the deer perhaps. But what about to us humans? Can we not appreciate its magnificence?

The eating of the deer, though an act of evil, is necessary so that we can have tigers. A world without a tiger would still be good but not as good as one with one.

If we were to strip away all the carnivores and only have plant eaters the world would still be good but not as good. And plant eaters still eat plants and thus commit an act of evil to the plant. Plants are also living organisms. They are violated by plant eaters.

If we strip away the plant eaters and only have plants the world is still good but not nearly as good as it was. And even plants compete with eachother for resources.

Now if we strip away the plants and have a barren rock world that would still be good. But it would not be as good as a world teeming with life.

So you see how it is necessary to permit certain evils in order for us to have the greater good of having tigers, plant eaters and even humans.

So to answer your question, the world is good. It is ultimately ordered from lower function organisms to higher functioning one’s. With Higher functioning organisms requiring the sacrifices of lower functioning one’s in order to survive.

A plant may be good but it ultimately must sacrifice itself for the greater good so that we humans can exist. Everything has a function and is ordered to this good. Good does not come without a cost or sacrifice.
 
THE NATURAL IMPULSE FROM A JEWISH PERSPECTIVE

THE good impulse (yetser tov) and the evil impulse (yetser ra) are pictured in Jewish literature as wrestling in perpetual conflict within the heart of man. Satan is usually identified with the yetser ha-ra, the evil impulse. In the book of Job, Satan’s function is described as that of testing the sincerity of men’s characters. In Talmudic literature, Satan’s function is to strengthen man’s moral sense by leading him into temptation. It has been said that every man living shall assuredly meet with an hour of temptation, a certain critical hour, which shall more especially try his mettle.

According to a midrashic statement (Genesis Rabbah 9:9), the existence of the yetser ha-ra in the heart of man and the struggle to overcome it lends high value to the good that emerges from the inner battle. The two conflicting impulses, the good and bad tendencies, are said to be implanted in man as a consequence of his having been formed from the dust and endowed with a soul (Genesis 2:7).

According to rabbinic thinking, the evil impulse is to be found in man at birth; the good impulse begins to develop when he is thirteen years old. The teachings of the Torah are referred to as the antidote to the yetser ha-ra. Similarly, Ben Sira (21:11) states: “The man who keeps the Law controls his natural tendency.”

In commenting on the two yods in the word " ", (Genesis 2:7), the rabbis declare that God created both the yetser tov and the yetser ra (Berakhoth 61a). The command to love God “with all your heart” they interpret to mean “with both your impulses” (Berakhoth Ma), since both human elements can be employed in the service of God. “Were it not for the yetser ha-ra, no man would build a home or get married or follow an occupation” (Genesis Rabbah 9:9). The phrase “very good” (Genesis 1:31) is therefore explained, as alluding to the yetser ha-ra, frequently used in the sense of the productive urge.

Taken from the Encyclopedia of Jewish Concepts

Genesis 1:31
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.
 
JFJK said:
In Genesis we read several times: “And God saw that it was good”. Many things in the creation don’t appear good to me. For example: parasites, viruses, tsunami, forest fires. It’s also not crash-proof, humans already have the nuclear arsenal capable of wiping-out all life on Earth.

How to understand “good” in the biblical account:
  1. Not perfect but “good enough”
  2. Good in the sense “beautiful”, “nice”, “esthetic”, but also fragile.
  3. Good in God’s point of view doesn’t always mean good in human’s point of view
  4. It was good originally but it gradually became corrupt
  5. It was good but it suddenly became bad as a consequence of original sin (I heard this explanation from some christians)
  6. It is a moral appeal. If God saw it was good, than it means that any human who respects God must also respect the creation and always protect the environment.
What is the Catholic interpretation of “And God saw it was good?” All of the above?
Click to expand...
Note that the second day of creation is not called ‘good.’
 
Thank you for sharing your perspectives!
With the nuclear weapon example I wanted to illustrate that the life on Earth is quite vulnerable.That there appears to be fragile balance. How many animals and plants would survive a nuclear war? Or survive a big asteroid crash? Or how much of the Amazon rainforest will survive the warming of the atmosphere by a mere few degrees?

Or, is life in fact much more resilient than I think and what appears to be a weakness is a hidden strength. And “weak” or “vulnerable” doesn’t mean “not good enough”. I guess I’ll see for myself in the next few decades.
 
Note that the second day of creation is not called ‘good.’
Click to expand...
Good observation. Also in the first day God saw that “light was good” but there is no mention of “darkness was good”.
 
Robert_Sock said:
THE NATURAL IMPULSE FROM A JEWISH PERSPECTIVE

THE good impulse (yetser tov) and the evil impulse (yetser ra) are pictured in Jewish literature as wrestling in perpetual conflict within the heart of man. Satan is usually identified with the yetser ha-ra, the evil impulse. In the book of Job, Satan’s function is described as that of testing the sincerity of men’s characters. In Talmudic literature, Satan’s function is to strengthen man’s moral sense by leading him into temptation. It has been said that every man living shall assuredly meet with an hour of temptation, a certain critical hour, which shall more especially try his mettle.

According to a midrashic statement (Genesis Rabbah 9:9), the existence of the yetser ha-ra in the heart of man and the struggle to overcome it lends high value to the good that emerges from the inner battle. The two conflicting impulses, the good and bad tendencies, are said to be implanted in man as a consequence of his having been formed from the dust and endowed with a soul (Genesis 2:7).

According to rabbinic thinking, the evil impulse is to be found in man at birth; the good impulse begins to develop when he is thirteen years old. The teachings of the Torah are referred to as the antidote to the yetser ha-ra. Similarly, Ben Sira (21:11) states: “The man who keeps the Law controls his natural tendency.”

In commenting on the two yods in the word " ", (Genesis 2:7), the rabbis declare that God created both the yetser tov and the yetser ra (Berakhoth 61a). The command to love God “with all your heart” they interpret to mean “with both your impulses” (Berakhoth Ma), since both human elements can be employed in the service of God. “Were it not for the yetser ha-ra, no man would build a home or get married or follow an occupation” (Genesis Rabbah 9:9). The phrase “very good” (Genesis 1:31) is therefore explained, as alluding to the yetser ha-ra, frequently used in the sense of the productive urge.

Taken from the Encyclopedia of Jewish Concepts

Genesis 1:31
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.
Click to expand...
Interesting, I have always viewed it from the opposite perspective.

I believe children are innocent with no evil until puberty begins.

Without law there can be no transgression.
 
To follow up on my previous thought ‘are tigers good?’ we can start looking at other cases like viruses. Now if God permits evils like tigers eating deer in order to have a greater good then what can we say about viruses? Would the world be better if there are no viruses and humans never got sick? Well, the obvious answer is that yes it would appear that way to us humans, just like it would appear to deer that not having tigers would be a better world for them. To many of us it would be better to have magnificent tigers but not so to the deer.

So why then is there viruses? is there some higher order than humans that viruses bring good to? Is there a greater good to having viruses? Now, I am not a biologist so I dont know if viruses can have a positive impact on the ecosystem. But I do know that God permits them despite their negative impact on humans.

Viruses make us sick. Now, good can often come out of sickness. Many people who have survived illnesses have said they are glad they went through that because it taught them a needed lesson. Some report coming closer to God through the experience.

There are things that God permits that make us question God’s goodness just like the deer who question the need for the tiger. It is difficult for a deer to explain why there must be tigers though perhaps some deer who survive a tiger attack may say they feel closer to God.

The deer don’t have our perspective especially when we have one for dinner. Likewise, in our limited capacity we do not have God’s perspective on things. God is on a much higher order than us. Scripture says ‘who has known the mind of God, or who has councelled him?’ (Rom 11:34)

Thus, just because we don’t have all the answers for every evil that happens doesn’t mean that there is not a greater good that the mind of the Lord has forseen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top