The Knowledge of Evil

Chapter 9: The Knowledge of Evil

What should we call IT? We need a name for whenever we THINK one of these “Evil thoughts” that inspires us to DO one of these “Evil things.” What should we call this huge breakthrough of ours, imagined and brought to Life from out of NOTHING?

Sin.

Humanity’s search for “Evil” ultimately led us into the fuzzy conception of “sin.” The outlying expectation of “sin.” The author of Genesis has the Living God speaking of this remote, conceptual-prototype as: “‘Sin’ being at the door” (Genesis 4:7). For, still (Biblically speaking), no one had physically committed one in our tangible universe... yet. Until, finally, the actual, in the flesh, Relative-Manifestation of IT. Ground-breaking. World-shattering. Revolutionary. No less pragmatic of an effect upon humanity than the discovery of the wheel. The first sin. That is to say, the first documented one.

First, we should clean up the false teaching. Feel FREE to dismiss the lie added into the story, depicting Cain as hateful, selfish and ungodly. Specifically, the falsehood that Cain gave-unto-God the worst of his vegetables. You know... the Sunday School, Christian Bible-Study-Approved version of the story. Genesis clearly tells us that every fruit and vegetable comes from the ground — from the land. Therefore, ALL fruit and vegetables (the best to the worst of them) are “the fruit of the ground” or “the fruit of the land.” As was Cain’s offering. The original Hebrew text does not read that Cain brought “secondary fruit,” “rejected fruit” nor “maggot infested, disgusting fruit that had laid for days rotting in the dirt.” Here is how the Scripture actually reads:

Genesis 4:3 (Original Hebrew) “Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the land to Yahweh.”

We should compare actual Scripture to the Church-Version of the Cain and Abel story. Take a moment and carefully read what is written in the unembellished account (well... the mostly unembellished account) of Cain and Abel. Rub your eyes, splash some cold water on your face and read Genesis, Chapter 4:1-15. Fifteen little verses. Takes less than two minutes (same as the Living Parable).

Did you notice? Abel presented “the firstborn of his flock and of their fat.” So did Cain. After ALL, the fruit IS the choice part of the crop, the fat of the plant. There is no such mention of Cain bringing “the worst” of his crop. Nor is there anything questionable about “Cain’s attitude” as he brings his offering before God. ALL of these add-on parts of the story meant to trash Cain are nothing more than religious folklore. Actually, they are embellished falsehoods. Worse, the KJV inserts into Scripture the idea that “the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering; but, unto Cain and his offering He had not respect.” Most every Christian Bible-Maker follows suit. The NAB and the NIV insert the words, “with favor” — purporting that “God looked with favor, upon Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering He did not look with favor.” No such thing is written in the original Hebrew. More on that, momentarily.

The next monkey business comes exclusively from our modern-day Bible-Makers playing ring-and-run at the “sin at the door” verse. (Genesis 4:7) God warns Cain about the inevitable up and coming confrontation between him and his younger brother, Abel. If Cain does not handle this confrontation well, “sin lieth at the door.” However, if Cain does handle it well, then ALL will be cool. Abel will still adore his older brother (as he always has) and Cain will continue under God’s blue heaven as Adam’s Number-One-Son — Cain being the firstborn with ALL such manmade honors accompanying his birthright. Where do I get ALL that from? From the original Hebrew Genesis text. The King James Version reads almost verbatim:

Genesis 4:7 (KJV) “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

Take a good look at that last sentence (directly above). God is referring to Abel (his/him) as He speaks to Cain (thee/thou):

“And unto THEE shall be HIS desire, and THOU shalt rule over HIM.”

Ready for the “ring-and-run” translation? ALL Fundamentally-Inspired modern translations change Abel’s pronouns (“his” and “him”) to read as if God is still talking to Cain about “Sin” (“IT” and “IT”).

Genesis 4:7 (NIV) “IT (‘sin’) desires to have you, but you must rule over IT.”

NIV reasoning? Let’s just make it up as we go along to fit our Fundamental agenda.

As far as the NIV (New International Version) editors are concerned, this is progressive Church-Policy for Christian Bible-Making. These newer Bible versions do tend to put their own special Christian slant on things. As in, let’s insert our Christian predicament — “struggling with sin” — into the Cain and Abel story. The scariest part? The NIV happens to be the most read Bible in our modern-day world; gaining even more popularity as you are reading this. Missionaries commonly give the NIV to Bible-starved indigents who accept it as genuine Scripture.

Even worse, the Catholic approved New American Bible-Makers reinvented Genesis 4:7 outright. The archbishops transgendered “his” (the Abel-pronoun) to identify AS “sin.” Having the temerity to print it this way in the 1970 NAB first edition (and every edition since) the “Faithful” have falsified and continue to falsify a direct quote from God. These Bible-Makers have rewritten Genesis to read, “Sin is a demon” — a he-demon, coming directly at Cain for Cain to struggle-with and master. Entirely fabricated. Read it for yourself:

Genesis 4:7 (NAB) “If you do well, you can hold up your head; but if not, sin is a demon lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master.”

As far as we know (from the text) there are only four human beings alive on the planet at this juncture. The idea that anyone here, in the primeval world, can “rule over sin” is a Christian notion which our modern-day Bible-Makers have inserted upon the characters of the early Genesis story. The four Living people in this Newly-Created-World are neither slave nor master to Sin. For, no one has committed one... yet. Precisely why God refers to “sin” in such other-worldly terms, “lying at the door.”

ALL the ancient texts at Genesis 4:7 agree that, clearly, God is talking to Cain in regard to Cain’s impending conversation with Abel. God is NOT talking to Cain in regard to Christianity’s “struggle with sin.” Again, in the King James Version, God speaks to Cain about Abel:

Genesis 4:7 (KJV) “And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

Nothing new. God says the exact same thing to Eve about Adam in the previous Genesis chapter.

Genesis 3:16 (KJV) “And thy desire shall be to thy husband. And he shall rule over thee.”

Strange, isn’t it? When it comes to a husband ruling over a wife, the NIV Bible-Makers have no problem getting the pronouns correct at Genesis 3:16. See for yourself:

Genesis 3:16 (NIV) “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

Nor do the Catholic NAB editors find the need to invent “a demon,” thus recreating Genesis 3:16 same as they recreated Genesis 4:7. Instead, the archbishops provide almost the exact same translation of Genesis 3:16 found in the KJV and the NIV:

Genesis 3:16 (NAB) “Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master.”

Judeo/Christian tradition dictates that manmade “God-Given Ruling Power” exists with a husband ruling over his wife AND with a firstborn son ruling over his younger brother. Why then, within the Cain and Abel episode, do these Bible-Makers ignore the manmade practice of the firstborn eldest son ruling over his younger brother? Because Cain being advertised as Adam’s Number One Son (even worse, as Abel’s “master”) does not help the Christian narrative.

Truth be told, one person ruling over another is manmade foolishness inspired by Master Knowledge of Good & Evil. If one were to read Scripture without Master Knowledge of Good & Evil in one’s ear, one would immediately realize that God DOES NOT COMMAND primordial humanity to put such stupidity into action. Rather, this is God’s FORECAST that such manmade stupidity WILL come into action. Husbands WILL rule over wives. First-borns WILL rule over siblings. Kings WILL rule over nations. Priests WILL rule over congregations. ALL proceeding under the same institution: Masters WILL rule over slaves.

Without the Knowledge of Good & Evil in the works, no human being would succumb to ruling over a human being nor being ruled over by another human being. The Living God never decreed such vile absurdity upon us. Nor did the Living God decree homicide and deceit upon us. Humanity has brought ALL of these Evils into the Living God’s VERY GOOD Creation. Our sickness decrees it. Without the Knowledge of Good & Evil in the works, nobody kills his brother because he “believes” that “God likes fatted first-born animals set on fire better than a basket of berries set on fire.” Ever wonder why there are so many rational Atheists? Because no rational thinker (un-brainwashed by the “Faithful”) could ever bring himself to “believe” that “God,” as He is explained to us by Organized Religion, could ever be so stupid and evil. Many rational and intelligent Christians put method, rationality and intelligence aside in favor of their Organized Religion (Judeo/Christianity). As do many Atheists put method, rationality and intelligence aside in favor of their Organized Religion (Abiogenesis/Evolution).

Led by The Knowledge of Good & Evil, we (humankind) bring many stupid, Evil things to Life from out of our imagination — a Conscience, then Judgment, then Guilt, then Organized Religion, then Sin.

Amazing. We brought Organized Religion into this world before we brought Sin into this world; actually, JUST BEFORE we brought Sin into this world. Organized Religion is the spark that lights the fire. The burnt offerings of Cain & Abel are the central issue that leads directly to homicide — the first Sin. Why do you suppose? Because Master Knowledge of Good & Evil is the Diabolical-Force behind Organized Religion. Our Heavenly Father warned us never to touch IT, while, at the same time, the Desolate One (working the snake) bamboozled us into eating IT. There would be no Organized Religion if not for us eating the fruit of The Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil. Organized Religion is the undeniable offspring of Master Knowledge of Good & Evil. The paternity test comes back 100% positive. Organized Religion MUST have things in terms of right & wrong. Meaning? If there IS a right there HAS to be a wrong. Organized Religion can only exist in the mindset of right & wrong. Religion dictates: Since there IS Good in this world, there HAS to be Evil in this world. With the Knowledge of Good & Evil AND the practice of Organized Religion in the works... wow. It is best to walk the Earth tippy-toe, upon eggshells.

As Elmer Fudd suggests, “Be verwee, verwee careful.”

Take a sniff. That unspeakable danger-in-the-air is exactly why soccer moms prefer not to keep score. Especially, if both teams huddle in prayer before the game. For, if, numerically (by the score) before God and Heaven, we declare one team... the winners (*Good*) the other team of seven-year-olds has no other choice, before God and Heaven, but to be seen as the losers (*Evil*). No, son, we don’t want you to feel badly (*Evil*) about yourself. You’re not a loser. You only lost THIS time. You’ll just have to try harder NEXT time. Yikes. The next time comes. Danny and his team DID try harder before God and Heaven. They lost again... before God and Heaven. And, yet again... before God and Heaven. They ended the season 0-15... before God and Heaven.

“Oh, my God!” cries Danny. “I AM an outright loser in God’s sight!”

In the language of Organized Religion (inserted into the Genesis text) the answer is harsh, yet simple. God has respect for Timmy and his team. But, as for Danny and his team? God has no respect.

I’ll just go kill myself now, Danny says. On second thought, I’ll kill Timmy, his entire team... and THEN I’ll kill myself. Better yet, I’ll wait till I get to high school, put on my camouflage outfit, strap on my semi-automatic hardware and take out ALL the jocks, ALL the cheerleaders and any other — *Good* — students I come across in my paramilitary wake. And... THEN... I’ll kill myself.

Sounds terribly familiar, doesn’t it?

We have Religion, marching to the tune of its Master (Master Knowledge of Good & Evil) to blame for this. By “this” of course I mean the Columbine tragedy and every school-shooting tragedy since. The Waco tragedy. The 911 tragedy. The World War Two tragedy. The World War One tragedy. The Napoleonic Wars tragedy. The Crusades tragedy. The brother-with-blue-colors who kills his own brother-with-red-colors tragedy. It can ALL be traced ALL the way back to the Cain & Abel tragedy. We have Organized Religion (working under The Knowledge of Good & Evil) to blame for ALL of this.

Think about it. What is Organized Religion?

A pooling of abstract “beliefs” into some kind of Organized Structure. Questions, leading to presumptions about God. The most dangerous questions always beginning with “why?”

Why did God do this? And... Why did God prefer this over that?

Leading to presumptions.

I “believe” that THIS is what God means. And, I have “faith” that THAT is what God wants us to do.

Organized Religion only needs two ingredients to come alive — as in, horror-movie-alive. (“IT’S alive!”) The Knowledge of Good & Evil and... Time.

Genesis 4:3 (KJV) “And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering unto the Lord.”

Cain got Religion. And, then, his brother Abel did the same (but not quite the same). Did the Living God require “sacrifices” from second generation humanity? Absolutely not. Then... what is this “invention”? A burnt-offering? It is a Relative action spun out of the primeval birth of Organized Religion. Keep in mind, both Cain and Abel were religiously doing this. That takes organization. It takes pooling abstract and even insane “beliefs” into some kind of organized structure.

Roy, a Southern Baptist Mature-Christian, takes issue, “Insane beliefs?”

Yes. They come forth out of our mental illness (The Knowledge of Good & Evil). I could write a book about the Living God having no needs; but, the Holy Spirit suffices to say:

“God has no needs.”

As for what God prefers? Best for us mere humans not to worry our pretty little heads about it. Best not to ask the insanely stupid “preference-question” about God.

Why does God prefer this? And... Why did God not prefer that?

The God’s-Honest Truth? It is really none of our business. God’s ways are not our ways. We should not even try to understand such things. What would be the point in us knowing? The answer (that we concoct) can only end in disaster and tragedy among us. On the other hand, it is quite commendable and Truly profitable for us to ask these “why” questions about ourselves. So, then... why do our answers (actually, our invented, uninspired presumptions) concerning the question of God’s preference, always end in disaster and tragedy for us? Because, as humans (within our limited perspective) we are filtering our answer (our Judgment) straight through our mental disease. Straight through our brain cancer — The Knowledge of Good & Evil.

Like with Timmy and Danny and their respective soccer teams. Safe to say, God’s preference does not mean: Timmy (and his team) are *Good* and, therefore, Danny (and his team) are *Evil.* Likewise, it does not mean: We should see fatted meat as *Good* and ripe vegetables and fruit as *Evil.* Point being? The supposed motive for the first murder — jealousy over God’s presumed partiality — had absolutely nothing to do with the offerings themselves being *Right* or *Wrong.* Or *Good* or *Evil.* To attach “Right” & “Wrong” to the offerings is subjective presumption. Religious embellishment inspired by Master Knowledge of Good & Evil — aka: Lackadaisical Judgment.

Abel’s sacrifice is *Right.* Cain’s sacrifice is *Wrong.*

Religion’s Life-Giving oxygen: “Right” & “Wrong.” God never said, QUOTE: “I have respect for Abel and his offering, but unto Cain and his offering I have no respect.” God never SAID any such thing. Rather, that part of the story is an inserted fabrication. The word “respect” has been inserted into Scripture by editorial authority, for the purpose of embellishing Christian story-time.

The original Hebrew reads quite peculiar:

“God turned to Abel and his offering, but to Cain and his offering He did not turn.”

Peculiar, as in: Totally mysterious. The original Hebrew text does not state that God turned to Abel... in favor. Nope. Just “turned.” And, to the other brother “He did not turn.” One can read anything one would like into the text. But, why would anyone WANT to read anything into it? Master Knowledge of Good & Evil parentally encourages Organized Religion to read something into it. Organized Religion (the daughter of Master Knowledge of Good & Evil) loves to read something into it. It is called... “agenda.” And, yet, the Scripture simple reads: God TURNED to Abel and his offering. Actually, the most common use of the Hebrew (way-yi-ša) is “to gaze.” So, literally, God GAZED upon Abel and his offering. But, unto Cain and his offering, He did not GAZE.

Seemingly, there are only two explanations for God’s double-take. 1): Whomsoever God “turns to” gets the blue ribbon. Or... 2): God is flabbergasted. Sacrifices? Cain’s display, being of no real concern — just a bunch of vegetables going up in smoke. However, Abel took it upon himself to slaughter a Living creature, “believing” that such an act could... somehow... be pleasing to a mentally sound and otherwise sensible God. And, so, God TURNS to Abel, GAZING upon this atrocity in horror. It remains God’s mystery. We do not know the full story. Does God turn to Abel in favor? Or in horror?

In either scenario, The Knowledge of Good & Evil is the powerful inspiration for homicide.

The Holy Spirit gives us Science Fair Parable Number One, illustrating the Judeo/Christian assumption and consequential insert: “God Looked Upon Abel’s Offering With Favor.” Suppose there is only one prize to be won at a Science Fair. A blue ribbon goes to the winner. It comes down to two girls, Betty and Laura, who have both submitted excellent exhibits. They both did excellent research. They both displayed excellent presentations. But, somebody’s project has got to be the best. Overall, we think Betty’s project is the best. Thus, we turn to Betty and her science project in favor and we pin the blue ribbon onto her lapel. The plot sickens. Betty and Laura (as active witnesses) suggest a much more malevolent conclusion. Their conclusions are identical, ridiculous, reckless and even horrific:

The Judges turned to Betty and her science project — liking it. Respecting it. However, to Laura, and her science project, the Judges did NOT turn — they did NOT like it. They had no respect for it whatsoever. Worse, they disrespected it.

Now, Betty and Laura have to come up with a reason — Why? And, so, they ask themselves the stupid and dangerous question:

What is THE MEANING of the Judges’ preference? Why did the Judges choose Betty over Laura?

Betty and Laura arrive upon the same Judgment, both collectively and individually.

THE COLLECTIVE JUDGMENT OF BETTY AND LAURA

The Judges have respect for Betty and her project. But, unto Laura and her project, the Judges have no respect. This can mean only one thing: Betty is *Good* and Laura is *Evil.*

THE INDIVIDUAL JUDGMENT OF BETTY AND LAURA

Laura’s Judgment: The Judges respect Betty’s project and find it *Good.* Therefore... she is *Good.* However, they disrespected my project and find it *Evil.* Therefore... I am *Evil.*

Betty’s Judgment: The Judges like my project better than yours! Neener neener! They respect me and disrespect you, because my project is *Good* and your project is *Evil.* I’m *Good.* You’re *Evil.*

Thanks, Holy Spirit. We have already gained one important insight from Science Fair Parable Number One. In order for the “respect” insert to be an accurate paraphrase, Cain and Abel must BOTH presume: “God has respect for Abel and his sacrifice; but, unto Cain and his offering, God has no respect.” True, the idea itself is TOTAL presumption even from Cain and Abel’s perspective. Likewise, The Church totally presumes: This is Cain’s motive for killing his brother.

CAIN’S JUDGMENT: God finds Abel’s sacrifice... *Good.* Which can only mean that God finds my sacrifice... *Evil.* Adding fuel to the fire is...

ABEL’S JUDGMENT: God likes my sacrifice better than yours! Neener neener! My sacrifice is... *Good.* And, your sacrifice is... *Evil*!

None of this presumption is inspired by the Living God. How do we know this? For the third time — God never SAYS any such thing. Not to Cain. Not to Abel. And, not to Moses, the inspired author. Every one of these presumptions are inspired by Master Knowledge of Good & Evil. Science Fair Parable Number One helps us plainly see a very important Truth. Laura and Betty’s logic is imagined and absurd. Likewise, the presumption that “God has no respect for Cain” is equally absurd and a meritless product of human imagination. One arrives at this simple Truth once the lie is entirely removed from the telling of the story.

You do remember the lie, don’t you? Nowhere in the text does it read that Cain brought God “the worst” of his crop — secondary fruit. Once the lie is removed from the telling of the story, so goes the MANufactured reason as to WHY God would like Abel’s offering over Cain’s offering. And, guess what? This presumption of MAN — this lie — is also inspired by Master Knowledge of Good & Evil.

If Science Fair Parable Number One Truly depicts what was going on in God’s Mind, the story itself provides NO GIVEN REASON as to WHY God likes Abel’s offering best. No reason nor explanation is necessary. It is not our business. It is not even Cain and Abel’s business. It is God’s business. If so, it is a simple and innocent preference on God’s part. There is no natural reason for Cain to be hurt by this. It does not mean that God does not like Cain’s offering at ALL. It certainly does not mean that God no longer has any respect for Cain. The text would concur that even God is perplexed with Cain’s feelings:

Genesis 4:6 (KJV) “And the Lord said unto Cain, “Why art thou wroth? And, why is thy countenance fallen?”

If we accept Science Fair Parable Number One as “The Explanation” then motive becomes elementary. With The Knowledge of Good and Evil in the works comes trouble. Cain and Abel’s Judgment based upon their limited perspective (fed by ignorant presumption) leads to a heartbreaking conclusion. Heartbreaking for Cain. Head-breaking for Abel. Their imaginations fed by Good & Evil go off the deep end. Cain and Abel and The Church are ALL in total Judicial agreement: God likes Abel, because Abel is *Good.* God “has respect” for Abel. God does not like Cain, because Cain is *Evil.* Therefore, God “has no respect” for Cain. Until, finally, Cain’s imagination takes it one tragic step further.

Thinks Cain: Wait a second! I was PERFECTLY *Good* in God’s sight before ALL this happened! However, I will remain *less-Good* in God’s sight as long as Abel continues to BE in God’s sight. Therefore, the very sight of Abel is *Evil.* For the very preservation of my own *Goodness,* Abel must be completely done AWAY with!

Then again, there is the distinct possibility of the... entirely... other... scenario. What if ALL this happened because God was appalled by Abel’s offering? This conclusion fits the Scriptures every bit as well. Actually, “believe” it or not, this conclusion fits best. This conclusion fits across the board.

First: The Living God has no need nor want of sacrifices and offerings. He specifically tells us so:

Hosea 6:6 (NIV) “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.”

Second: The Living God made animals first and then us. Outside of an Animal Rights Convention, animals for food? Sure, we can have at them. For clothing? No problem. But, here is where the Animal Rights Convention floods into the general consensus of civilized humanity: To display a living creature in senseless slaughter? Worse, under the whim that God would take “delight” in such a barbaric act? The general consensus of civilization is that only a twisted sociopath could do or condone such an act.

In Light of these two premises, the Holy Spirit provides us with Science Fair Parable Number Two: There is no prize to be won at the Science Fair. Two girls, Betty and Laura, simply take it upon themselves to each do a science project for extra credit. Laura shows how plants make oxygen through photosynthesis. While Betty demonstrates the effects of direct current as the best form of capital punishment. Specifically, Betty has two car batteries connected to a live cat. She proceeds to electrocute the kitty cat before our astonished eyes. The feline screams and hisses in pain until its extremities rupture into flames and its eyes pop out of its head. Dark blood pours from its empty eye sockets. Smoke and the stench of burnt flesh and fur fills the room... and our nostrils. In ALL sensibility, we turn to Betty and her science project in horror and absolute appall! The plot thickens (or thins?): To Laura, and her science project, we did not turn.

As the parable relates to Cain and Abel, the Lord is equally aghast by Abel’s display of senseless cruelty; however, the Lord God wants to know directly from Cain: Why is Cain so distraught over this?

Genesis 4:6 (KJV) “And the Lord said unto Cain, “Why art thou wroth? And, why is thy countenance fallen?”

For the exact same reason God’s countenance has fallen. Cain is appalled by the terrible waste of conscious Life brought about by the hands of his little brother. Being the older brother, Cain blames himself as a bad influence. Cain presents a burnt offering. Monkey see monkey do. Little brother does the same thing, only with a live animal! Cain is determined. He needs to have a serious talk with his wayward younger brother.

God takes up counsel with Cain, offering encouragement and a warning. Should Cain’s talk with his little brother go south, disaster awaits at the door. However, if Cain’s talk with Abel goes well, Abel will accept Cain’s instruction with open arms; showing his love for his older, more experienced brother:

Genesis 4:7 (KJV) “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

Still... with The Knowledge of Good & Evil in the works comes trouble. Cain confronts his younger brother in the field with Good & Evil Judgment. Cain forbids Abel ever again to arbitrarily take the Life of a Living creature:

Killing to bring favor to yourself is *Evil.* We take life only for food or if clothing is needed.

Abel tells his older brother to go pound sand:

They’re MY animals and I’ll do whatever the hell I want to do with them. Eat them or burn them. Use them for profit or sport. I can pet them. Or I can use them for batting practice if I so like.

Is that so? says Cain. You like to pick on things smaller than you, do you? Well, let’s see how YOU like it! And, Cain gives Abel a whack on the head. Too strong of a whack.

One thing is certain. In both scenarios, with Good & Evil applied directly to the issue, it becomes entirely personal. The sacrifices themselves become the extension of Cain and Abel’s core self-worth. Mind you, not what God actually thinks of Cain and Abel. What Cain and Abel imagine God thinks of them — especially as the two brothers sort things out in the field.