Is it sinful to hate the material and natural worlds?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Robert_Sock

Guest
I hate them both, and I know that this is not what the Church teaches, but I cannot get myself to ‘worship’ these things. I worship God and the supernatural world.

In Genesis when God calls everything ‘very good,’ we need to understand that the term ‘very good’ is actual evil in Jewish tradition. I have more on this from a Jewish encyclopedia if anyone is interested.
 
Robert_Sock said:
I hate them both, and I know that this is not what the Church teaches, but I cannot get myself to ‘worship’ these things. I worship God and the supernatural world.

In Genesis when God calls everything ‘very good,’ we need to understand that the term ‘very good’ is actual evil in Jewish tradition. I have more on this from a Jewish encyclopedia if anyone is interested.
Click to expand...
I’m a little confused. God makes everything good, and it turns out that good or “very good” is evil? That belief sounds like Gnosticism to me. The Gnostics hated the physical word and thought that all things of the material world were evil created by an evil god in the Old Testament that was different from good God, Jesus Christ.

The truth is, the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament and when he said that what He created was good, YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!!🙂

I’d still be interested in the Jewish Encyclopedia reference though.
 
pprimeau1976 said:
I’m a little confused. God makes everything good, and it turns out that good or “very good” is evil? That belief sounds like Gnosticism to me. The Gnostics hated the physical word and thought that all things of the material world were evil created by an evil god in the Old Testament that was different from good God, Jesus Christ.

The truth is, the God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament and when he said that what He created was good, YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!!🙂

I’d still be interested in the Jewish Encyclopedia reference though.
Click to expand...
NATURAL IMPULSE
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.
Click to expand...
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).
Click to expand...
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.”
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
Taken from the Encyclopedia of Jewish Concepts
Click to expand...
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...
 
I’m sorry, perhaps I am misunderstanding you and your additional explanation. Are you arguing that God, at the creation of all, deemed it to be very good, and that what God deems as very good is actually evil?
 
Robert_Sock said:
NATURAL IMPULSE
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...
Um… I’m not even sure what stuff like “Berakhoth” and “Rabbah 9:9” mean…

Two comments though:
  1. “…begins to develop when he is thirteen years old” clearly refers the bar mitzvahs and bat mitzvahs, which are distinctly Jewish, not Christian
  2. I don’t understand why an encyclopedia of Jewish concepts would have any weight in Church teachings 🤷
 
Robert_Sock said:
I hate them both, and I know that this is not what the Church teaches, but I cannot get myself to ‘worship’ these things. I worship God and the supernatural world.

In Genesis when God calls everything ‘very good,’ we need to understand that the term ‘very good’ is actual evil in Jewish tradition. I have more on this from a Jewish encyclopedia if anyone is interested.
Click to expand...
The opposite of hate is not worship.

God created the material and natural world to be lived in, and gave it as a gift to man. To hate that which God has created and has given to you is to reject God.

With all respect, the Catholic Church, while having respect for its roots in the Jewish faith, is not Jewish. Perhaps you should seek some Catholic theological discussions on the meaning of Genesis 1:31
 
For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. John3:16
 
I am also confused.

To hate the material and natural world seems to be the error that the Gnostics fell into.
 
Sarcelle said:
I am also confused.

To hate the material and natural world seems to be the error that the Gnostics fell into.
Click to expand...
:yup:

This is not at all the Catholic way of thinking about things. Creation is good. Goodness and existence are intimitely connected in Catholic thought. Some things exist more fully than others and so have more goodness, but if it exists then it is good. Evil is seen as a lack of goodness just as darkness is a lack of light etc, not something that actually exists.

Besides that, I truly don’t understand how anyone could go climb a mountain or watch a sunset and not be awed by the beauty and goodness of the natural world around us. It is good.
 
a) “Not hating” does not equal “worshipping.” Where did you get that idea?

b) Hating God’s creation is extremely disrespectful of Him.
Robert_Sock said:
I hate them both, and I know that this is not what the Church teaches, but I cannot get myself to ‘worship’ these things. I worship God and the supernatural world.

In Genesis when God calls everything ‘very good,’ we need to understand that the term ‘very good’ is actual evil in Jewish tradition. I have more on this from a Jewish encyclopedia if anyone is interested.
Click to expand...
 
What do you make of the Incarnation? God became man and took on material human flesh.
 
Robert_Sock said:
What would the ‘worship’ of these things entail?

Why would this be disrespectful of God? I would think that hating the supernatural would be more disrespectful? Please explain?
Click to expand...
How does loving and respecting what God created suddenly mean you must hate the supernatural? I don’t understand your leap on that.
 
Ophelia23 said:
How does loving and respecting what God created suddenly mean you must hate the supernatural? I don’t understand your leap on that.
Click to expand...
Hating the supernatural is independent of hating the natural. I just used it as an example.
 
Ophelia23 said:
How does loving and respecting what God created suddenly mean you must hate the supernatural? I don’t understand your leap on that.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The OP is setting up a false dichotomy. It is possible to avoid hating both the natural and the supernatural. That is what we are supposed to do, love all of God’s creation, both material and immaterial. This isn’t and either/or situation.
 
Robert_Sock said:
Hating the supernatural is independent of hating the natural. I just used it as an example.
Click to expand...
Robert, it is an irrelevant example. One can not love what God has created in the supernatural without loving the natural. To hate God’s creation is to reject God. To state that God’s assessment of ‘very good’ as actually meaning ‘evil’ is not only misguided, it is downright heretical. I reject your argument entirely based on this.

How can you claim to love the supernatural and yet also claim to hate the natural? We are made in the very image of the supernatural. The Supernatural was sent to Earth to become man. The natural, the supernatural, these are both extensions of the One True God. To claim to hate one and love the other divides them apart in a way that even God himself did not see fit. Are you to believe that your own assessment is greater than that which was given to us by God, and thus more worthy? Surely you can see how faulty this whole argument is.
 
Ophelia23 said:
Robert, it is an irrelevant example. One can not love what God has created in the supernatural without loving the natural. To hate God’s creation is to reject God. To state that God’s assessment of ‘very good’ as actually meaning ‘evil’ is not only misguided, it is downright heretical. I reject your argument entirely based on this.

How can you claim to love the supernatural and yet also claim to hate the natural? We are made in the very image of the supernatural. The Supernatural was sent to Earth to become man. The natural, the supernatural, these are both extensions of the One True God. To claim to hate one and love the other divides them apart in a way that even God himself did not see fit. Are you to believe that your own assessment is greater than that which was given to us by God, and thus more worthy? Surely you can see how faulty this whole argument is.
Click to expand...
What about things like earthquakes, tornadoes and hurricanes; are these things ‘good’ too. They are a part of God’s creation too, but few of us would call them ‘good.’ So, it would seem plausible that a person could easily hate at least some of the natural world. But why stop there, and recognize that all of the natural world is ‘evil.’
 
Robert,

Here’s the things that jumped out at me. But rather than re-quote the entire thing, I’ll quote the pertinent sections.
The Encyclopedia of Jewish Concepts via Robert Sock said:
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 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.
Click to expand...
I don’t know much about Jewish theology, but what they quote from the Talmud somewhat contradicts Catholic doctrine. I equate the evil impulse they’re talking about to what Catholic tradition calls concupiscence. Concupiscence did not exist before the fall, it is a consequence of the fall.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church said:
2515 Etymologically, “concupiscence” can refer to any intense form of human desire. Christian theology has given it a particular meaning: the movement of the sensitive appetite contrary to the operation of the human reason. The apostle St. Paul identifies it with the rebellion of the “flesh” against the “spirit.”Concupiscence stems from the disobedience of the first sin. It unsettles man’s moral faculties and, without being in itself an offense, inclines man to commit sins.

2516Because man is a composite being, spirit and body, there already exists a certain tension in him; a certain struggle of tendencies between “spirit” and “flesh” develops. But in fact this struggle belongs to the heritage of sin. It is a consequence of sin and at the same time a confirmation of it. It is part of the daily experience of the spiritual battle:
For the Apostle it is not a matter of despising and condemning the body which with the spiritual soul constitutes man’s nature and personal subjectivity. Rather, he is concerned with the morally good or bad works, or better, the permanent dispositions—virtues and vices—which are the fruit of submission (in the first case) or of resistance (in the second case) to the saving action of the Holy Spirit. For this reason the Apostle writes: “If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.” - John Paul II, DeV 55; cf. Gal 5:25
Click to expand...

So to sum up, there is a HUGE misunderstanding as to what God created and what is actually a consequence of the fall. Everything that God created was good. Is it okay to hate the results of the fall - yes. But don’t blame it on God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top