How is matter not evil?

I understand the world was created good, but since the fall, (regardless whether you believe it to be literal or not so literal), how is matter itself not inherently evil? I know its a rather gn*stic point of view, but I can't help but seeing that to be true and everything of humanism to be false.

Attached: Augustine1.jpg (209x350, 15.04K)

Because the Resurrection redeemed all of Creation.

Man fell, not the world and creation.

"and God saw that it was good"

Evil is intentional action, it requires a mind/soul to will evil, matter is neutral in this regard.

All of creation is fallen, but fallen means coming short of ideal perfection , for man this is moral perfection, for matter it is coming short of harmony/equilibrium.
The fall affects different
phenomena in different ways.

Let go of gnostic nonsense.

Why should it be?

Not yet, because the new heaven and new earth haven't come

It doesn't matter because the evil that really destroys you is the one that comes out of yourself. We're not like muslims who believe in haram and halal things, we care the most about the internal struggle of man.

Wouldnt that imply that the material world is evil, and we are saved from it by the grace of God?

God created matter, therefore matter is good.

Attached: St. John of Damascus.jpg (640x852, 129.49K)

Matter was created by God. How can that which is created by God be evil?

Do you have any reason to believe that the corruption of desires after the fall is to be attributed to matter rather than to souls?

(cont.) Because this is what this passage is about: inordinate and corrupt desires, such as gluttony, lust and pride. The Greek text has it clearer through the use of the word "ἐπιθυμία".

gnostic dualism.
heresy.

NEXT!

Attached: christianity-aint-dualism.png (500x459, 368.99K)

Ok, so you need to distinguish between fallen and inherently bad. The gnostics believed that all matter was Inherently bad and evil and because of this denied the actual physical body of our Lord. But what Christians are saying is that the world has fallen, that although it is good it has been touched by sin and has fallen. Not inherently bad but rather in need of washing. Think of a baby who has been playing in mud, would you call him inherently dirty or say there is dirt on him? What would be more appropriate? The devil is inherently sinful but God's creation is good but just fallen.

God created Lucifer therefore Lucifer is good.

Lucifer was good. He was the top angel in God's army after all. But he decided to rebel due to his pride and fell from grace. Just like how us humans are created by God and are inheritly good, but our sin holds us back from being in God's grace.

Attached: christ_and_demon.jpg (740x493, 212.11K)

So then could it be possible that matter was created to be good but fell?

Pick up a rock, hold it up, take a deep breath of the gaseous matter that we call air, and yell at the top of your lungs “THIS ROCK IS EVIL” and see how silly you sound.

A rock can't choose to be evil. A tree can't choose to disobey God. A shark may mistake your friend for a seal, but a shark is a dumb animal think of it like a robot, it is only following the programming God gave itand doesn't know any better, but the shark is still good.

What is the one thing that angels, demons, and humans all have in common that the rest of creation lacks? a conscience

-Adam CHOSE to listen to Eve and disobey God
-St. Michael the Archangel CHOSE to slay the devil on behalf of God when he could have easily just rebelled like his brothers and sisters
-The Demons CHOSE to follow Lucifer in his rebellion agianst God

So cut out all this gnostic nonsense that the material world is evil. You insult God by doing so.

Attached: obrazdevatichinov.jpg (850x1100, 391.05K)

Before Lucifer fell, why would God need an army?

Well I didn't even once state that matter was evil, I just asked a question.

I think that turning away from God is bad, and that misplacing priorities is also going to result in evil (which is why it's bad to place anything above God).

Therefore
Sorry Im not getting your logic

That's Michael. Lucifer was likely the most beautiful of all God's creations, but Michael is the archistrategos, head of God's army of angels.

To give an example from fantasy/sci-fi, If you have a tendency towards physical sickness, does that mean your fundamental essence is that of a Nurgle daemon?

would you say a molecule is evil, come on now

The Heavenly Host would have first been only musical choirs and observers of the Creation. God made them into an army when the need arose to expel Satan and his 1/3rd of all angels from Heaven.

cathars BEGONE

Attached: 280px-Innozenz3.jpg (280x352, 51.88K)

This board has a moderation problem

I understand, but humans are universally enslaved to sin. Even the most humble and god fearing still sin.

Doesnt it seem that salvation is salvation from the material, the sinful, into the realm of God? I am not a gnostic, I dont believe in any sort of gnosis or enlightened state where you can save yourself, I am asking this honestly with no intent to try to convert people to gnosticism.

Which is washed away when we get baptised in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Which is forgiven by the eternal love of Jesus Christ

Attached: psalms-32-5.jpg (688x360, 46.32K)

As others have already pointed out, matter, as created by God, properly conforms to itself, thus it is called good. Evil exists as privation, it is the difference between reality and the ideal, the actual good considered as a standard of measurement. Since the realm of matter is reality as we know it, it makes no sense to speak of it in such terms. Matter means change, and so long as it continues to change, it is being good at being matter. The only real evil then is moral evil, because there the weight of the ideal has actual force.

The problem arises from the fact that man is both material and immaterial. On one hand, the material aspects, rooted as they are in the particular, meaning change and limitation, point to our utter dependence upon God, while the immaterial aspects could give us the unwarranted belief, on the other, of an independence in hubris. Let us choose Life.

Attached: Okra_flower_2.jpg (800x572, 73.01K)

I could have worded it a little differently, because it's maybe a subtle point. Put simply: since the nature of matter is predicated on change and limitation, its ideal is not less change, i.e. the realm of the universal, but more or less the same amount of change. The ideal of the particular is not universality, but instead the universal particularity.