Deeper Roots: The Tree of Knowledge

In the article A High Call to Men and Women of Understanding, we defined Wisdom as “the foundational laws and principles governing the universe (and man) in its pre-fall state.” We then claimed that at the fall, man rejected wisdom and instead chose Knowledge, which we labeled as “any discovery of the systems/principles governing earth and man in its post-fall state.” Man made the switch from wisdom to knowledge by eating of the Tree of the “Knowledge of Good and Evil.” It is that phrase we will explore deeper in this article.

“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” Genesis 2:17 KJV

The Christian community often endorses the terms “good” and “evil” from this passage as moral descriptors. From pulpits across America, mankind is neatly sliced and separated into two moralistic categories: “good” or “evil,” commonly validated through the misrepresented sermon illustration of the sheep and goats. But the Hebrew roots of these terms unveil a different reality – and expose a deeply hidden strategy. By exploring the Hebrew definitions of the terms “good,” “evil,” and “knowledge,” from this verse we will shatter the current moralistic paradigm of the church, separate the pleasurable action from the malicious intent of sin, and unveil present day humanity’s critical moment in linear history…

The English term “good” used in Genesis 2:17 is the Hebrew word “towb.” “Towb” is a deep well of twenty classifications including: “excellent, rich, valuable in estimate, comparatively better, prosperity, and welfare.” “Towb” better depicts that which is highly beneficial, prosperous and valuable. While the church may claim, “ah, yes doing moral good produces such blessings” (certain church strains even base their entire ministry on it), the second Hebrew term pulls back even deeper layers. The term “evil” is the Hebrew word “Ra;’ ” its definition is also far denser than just wickedness or immorality. Here are a few of its definitions: Evil: (Ra’) “malignant, giving pain, misery, injurious, distress, calamity, and comparatively worse.” By combining a few of these Hebrew classifications, we gain further insight into this comparison: original sin opened man’s eyes to the:

the Knowledge of the Excellent and the Distressful
the Knowledge of the Rich and the Injurious
the Knowledge of the Valuable and the Miserable

Based strictly on these Hebrew classifications it would seem that if, after the fall mankind could choose between what was excellent or rich and what was injurious, malignant or painful, man would have adopted the former and rejected the later. But this was not the case. Genesis 6:5 tell us that the sum total of the humanity (minus Noah and family) thought of “evil (same word, Ra’) continually.” So “moral” definitions aside, mankind—given the choice between the rich and the distressful—deliberately chose injurious and miserable actions? How could this be?

THE COMPLICATIONS OF A LINEAR HUMANITY

Let’s go back to man’s beginning for a moment. According to scripture, God created man in His own image. But He kept man out of His mode of existence. God transcends time. But man was plunged into a linearly formatted environment. Man may act independently out of his own will. But because he is cordoned by the seconds, minutes, hours and days following any willful action, he is helpless to predict (or often even control) the consequences. After the fall, man was thrust into a world of endless possibility – and endlessly uncertain outcome.

Through this grid, let’s look at the tree again and postulate deeper meaning. We could say that man in the garden rejected wisdom and instead chose…the knowledge of actions that produce Excellent, Rich, or Valuable outcomes and actions that produce Injurious, Miserable, or Distressful outcomes.

This changes things dramatically. After the fall, man could independently choose actions with outcomes that might have been rich and rewarding or injurious and malignant. But he was kept from the God-like mechanism for objective determination (time transcendence). As Newton asserted through his law of relativity, outcome is only determined after a causal event. But any actions producing injurious outcomes may take months, years or decades to materialize. Ask the smoker who puffed his first cigarette at 17 and is forced to speak through a voice box at the age of 52, or the girl who had a few sexual partners in her early teens and just found out those moments led to the cervical cancer she now suffers at 43, or the man who lost the battle with gluttony as an early adolescent and is now losing the battle with diabetes-induced heart disease at 35.

So if outcomes only follow actions, and damaging outcomes may take considerable time to materialize, what metrics guided actions after the fall? We can propose that with little Providential guidance and no statistical data linking consequence to action, linearly-fixed humanity would have most likely assessed actions (once Maslow’s foundational Hierarchy of Needs were met) through whatever incited the most pleasure. Man, fettered to a linear existence, would not have intentionally chosen the malignant over the valuable. He would have purposely selected whatever produced the most pleasure in the immediate moment verses whatever negated, neutralized, or deferred pleasure.

This presents an even greater problem. Actions producing the most immediate pleasurable gratification can also generate the most malignant and injurious future outcome…

ACKNOWLEDGING SIN’S “PLEASURE”

The majority of what the church (or even Dante) calls “sins” are, at least at the beginning, highly pleasurable. Promiscuous sexual activity is one of the body’s top euphoric stimulants. Drugs produce instant physiological “highs.” Gluttony ignites the taste buds and creates rousing responses in the brain. A winning moment in gambling not only floods the player with financial reward, it floods the player’s brain with dopamine, the brain’s reward neurotransmitter. While the dogmatic church labels these and other “sinful” initial actions as “evil,” science is now unlocking how specifically wired our bodies are to relish these experiences. The church tends to run from or play down these realities. This is a gross failure. For by acknowledging the pleasurable aspect of sin, we able to links sin’s initial pleasures directly with intended malignant outcome (or “Ra”). The natural impulse of human preservation prevents willful and deliberate destruction to the body or even the society. Man is not going to throw himself at the onslaught of damaging biological, psychological, social, and generational consequences such as STDs, cancer, addiction, infertility, social incarceration, depression, and AIDS…

… without some form of incentive.

Taking Newton’s law a strategic step forward: “there must be an initial provoking action in order to produce a further injurious reaction.” Pleasure, for its instantaneous euphoric blitzkrieg on the physical flesh, is the most effective conduit between mankind and his exposure to linear consequential damage. Ask any financially, socially or biologically devastated alcoholic, drug addict, AIDS patient, convicted rapist, or abortion outpatient if he or she would willingly subject themselves to the aftereffects of these actions – without experiencing the primary pleasurable dividends (however debase they might be) of the initial action? The unanimous response would be, “of course not.” But it is only these pleasures that cause these byproducts. An AIDS patient did not contract AIDS while reading books at the library or trying on an AIDS-infected article of clothing at the mall. The average 40-year-old male is not going to be hauled off to prison on rape charges if he never commits the act. Devastated black lungs are not the byproduct of living a smoke-free life on a beach in Hawaii. One doesn’t visit the abortion clinic and destroy a growing life without a previous sexual encounter nor does a financially, socially and biologically devastated alcoholic become such a statistic by drinking ungodly amounts of Lipton Iced Tea.

BUT DON’T (JUST) BLAME MAN

Man would not have deliberately engaged in injurious actions; self-preservation would have prevented it. God certainly did not intend His image to suffer injurious action, He warned man not to eat of the tree. God recognized more was at stake than man’s separation from his Creator. Man is not only forced into a linear existence of cause and effect but he is also a fleshly being whose inherent physiology gravitates toward pleasure. If God created man as a pleasure sensitive organism, pleasure is not the culprit. But… if there were an outside force with the ability to influence a pleasure-centric organism incapable of analyzing action against intent, pleasure could be used as a mechanism.

BACK TO THE B.W.

The Biblical Worldview asserts that at the fall there was another party present. Man was coerced into eating from the tree. This deceiver, played in Genesis 3 as a serpent, is spoken of later in scripture as “satan” or “the adversary.” Scripture asserts this force is hell-bent to “kill, steal, and destroy” humanity. Understanding the danger of being given a god-like comprehension without the correct system to process actions (knowing the end from the beginning) combined with man’s inherent pleasure-centric physiology, the fall of man gave the enemy of humanity a perfect pathway to man’s “Ra’” demise. As long as pleasure remained the central metric, the strategy would remain concealed.

SECULAR SOCIETY’S CURRENT MISSTEP

To early post-fall humanity’s credit, none of this would have made any sense. But we can now unveil the “delusion” of the current secular mindset. Sinful pleasures are not to be embraced because they feel good. But it is only in the fact they do feel good that they can be capitalized upon as a legitimate strategy of destruction, initiated and now propagated by the one whose intent is humanity’s annihilation. “Sin” is like shards of glass dipped in smooth chocolate coating, which taste delicious and arousing in the mouth – and then lacerate the organs on the way down. The church has endlessly and vehemently attacked people for eating glass shards (seeing sin from the lens of religious morality), while the secular world scoffs saying, “you dogmatic fools, it’s chocolate” (seeing pleasure from the lens of secular freedom). What the church should have been saying is, “of course it’s chocolate; it’s the only way you’d willingly swallow the shards.”

THE CHURCH’S TRAGIC FAILURE

Sin is merely two sides of a coin; one side glistens and enraptures, the other side is corrosive and carcinogenic. But both the church (focused on sin’s immorality) and the secular world (focused on pleasure’s freedom) refuse to see the coin’s opposite side. While the secular group may be the biggest purveyors of this cycle of destruction (widespread adoption of pleasure-based “freedoms” leading to intended destruction), the blame falls far more squarely on side of the church. Because of the church’s elitism, alienation, and hypocrisy coupled with its inability to think strategically, sin in all of its glorious destructiveness, not only flourishes – but its many diverse pathways, such as gambling, pornography, etc, are given social and legislative authorization.

And because of this, the intentional malignant and distressful outcomes of sin are being managed, not understood.

Racked with disease, depression, apathy and despair, modern man suffers relentlessly from the intended “Ra” consequences of “sin’s” pleasurable first moments. But because of the ideological foundations of secularism (no Creator, no providential purpose, and no ultimate enemy), he dogmatically resists associating action with intent. Instead, he looks to whatever scientific, psychological, or entertainment-based savior can deaden or postpone the pain. Or worse, he plunges further into the pleasure pit futilely hoping the next (or stronger) dose of immediate euphoria will negate the previous buildup of malignant consequence. Like the famous icon of the snake consuming its own tail, man tears off more and more vital portions of his body – until there is no flesh left to consume: “And sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.” (Ja 1:15 NIV)

Only the Biblical Worldview exposes this malicious strategy and uncovers its mastermind. But since man wants little to do with the church’s supposed irrelevance and widespread hypocrisy, he continues to look for alleviation – not understanding—wasting billions upon billions of dollars on reactive solutions to an intentional and perpetual conspiracy.

SECULAR SCIENCE’S TRAGIC CONSEQUENCE

And as man continues to “evolve,” his brightest are playing further and further into this destructive game plan. As the self-imposed darling of modern science, pharmacology often attacks the malignant outcome of sin head on; but in doing so it often produces even greater biological or psychological damage. Pharmaceutical corporations mark their product labels with warnings of this damage; it follows right after the colon in front of the three-word phrase: “side effects include.” If a woman now wishes to engage in promiscuous sexual pleasure without suffering the uncertain fear and outcomes of pregnancy, pharmacological saviors now offer products to reduce her number of menstrual periods to a mere four per year. But she may also suffer heart attacks or risk future permanent infertility once she decides she’s ready for children. We could go on ad infinitum, but Wendell Barry’s quote will suffice:

“The smartest and most educated people in the world are the scientists, for they have already found solutions to all our problems and will soon find solutions to all the problems resulting from their solutions to all the problems we used to have.”
Wendell Barry: Sex, Economy, Freedom & Community

Through secularism’s countless false saviors, humanity not only suffers from sin’s intended consequence, but it now also suffers a host of new biological and psychological trauma. The world is wasting much of its limited financial resources on physiologically and psychologically damaging “solutions” that intentionally decimate mankind. And all the while the Bible-toting members of the single worldview capable of exposing this strategy remain content to myopically attack “sinners” for participating in pleasurable actions. The Christian community’s lack of depth not only destroys its credibility, but it also keeps this destructive system intact. For if society were to remove all of the potential remedies to STDs, AIDS, addiction, depression, poverty, anxiety disorder and other destructive outcomes of initially pleasurable actions, it would become instantly apparent which actions produce outcomes that are malignant, corrosive and damaging. But instead of focusing on consequence, both sides turn their ideological guns on one another. And neither side sees the true enemy. One side remains blinded because of erroneous ideology, the other because of arrogant stupidity. Because our side was given the mandate:

“Deliver those who are being taken away to death, And those who are staggering to slaughter, O hold them back. If you say, ‘See, we did not know this,’ does He not consider it who weighs the hearts?” Proverbs 24:11-12a NASB

While tossing off the moral shackles of institutional religious dogmatism, secular man re-shackles himself to a destructive system using man’s own pleasure-sensitive nature as the conduit toward his malicious demise. Proverbs echoes: “he who pursues evil (Ra’) will bring about his own death.” (Pr 11: 19b, NASB) In answer, the church waves hateful banners at various “deviant” subsets of society, dictates the moral behavior of its congregations, and launches pious crusades to “clean up” the “filth” in entertainment, government and schools. All the while perplexed at the yearly growing group of “sinners” and confounded at its serious deterioration as a cultural voice. The church has been far too concerned with being right to recognize the bleakness of its light. All the while, the tree continues producing its malignant fruit, shrouded behind a dense fog of religious moralism and secular pleasure seeking. Understanding our historical moment unveils the critical importance of dispelling this haze.

HUMANITY’S CRITICAL MOMENT (AND RESPONSIBILITY)

Let’s go back to the tree one more time and dissect the last unchallenged descriptor: the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of good and evil. Yet again, the English term does little to unlock the deeper truths. But thankfully, the Hebrew unveils far more: Knowledge: “Da’ath: insight, technical know-how, or science.” Combining all three Hebrew phrases, the fall of man began the journey toward understanding “the technical know-how or scientific determination behind actions that produce Excellent, Rich, or Valuable outcomes and actions that produce Injurious, Miserable, or Distressful outcomes.”

We now have two scenarios involving time: outcome and scientific expertise. Outcome is determined by physiology, natural law, and society; scientific expertise is determined by the educational, ideological, and technological progression necessary (in this case centuries and millennia) to make valid scientific postulations. Early man was completely blinded to both the realities of consequence and kept from any scientific means through which to study.

But the form of scientific study here is specific: the determination of how consequence plays out on humanity, especially how it plays out on the body. Therefore, the true exposure of the tree of knowledge could only be realized once man had the capacity to “inspect” the body scientifically. For the body is a far more precise metric than the “person.” A person can declare “nothing is wrong with me” while inside their body is being ravaged by cancer, sexual disease, etc. In other words, scientific determination unlocks truths and exposes fallacious declarations. And for millennia, man has been able to observe posthumously the outcome of actions on the body.

But to truly uncover how actions play out on the body would require scientific technology capable of “peering” into the body during physical function. That technology, from XRAY to ultrasound, is less than a half a century old. But we can get even more precise than that. Since the central nervous system is the “control center” of the body, the most accurate discoveries of how actions play out on the body could only occur when man grew able to peer into the human brain during moments of activity. Through technologies such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scientists and doctors are able to view the brain in precisely this manner. And these technologies are only decades old (PET was first introduced in 1976, and in the 1990s Seiji Ogawa and Ken Kwong are credited for the first fMRIs).

From the instantaneous linear moment that marked the fall of man, only the scientific and technological advancements of this precise moment in our “brief history of time” can address and expose the non-moral, Hebrew-intended meaning of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Twenty-first century science daily uncovers the physiologic strategies of “sin,” for science is perpetually honing its tools to better unlock how our bodies are wired, how the brain controls and determines action, how diseases flourish inside the body, etc. So why hasn’t mainstream mankind grown privy to these strategies? Because the marvels of modern scientific determination are filtered through the wrong worldview.

Without a lens capable of linking action specifically to consequence, each new report or discovery from the secular scientific community simply gives its experts a more accurate depiction of how to manage consequence. And so the cycle continues. As man placed greater distance between himself and his Creator, he has thrust himself against the deadliest side of linear time (‘Ra’ consequence), still blissfully declaring “I’m free to do what I want any old time.” Disease, depression, and addiction not only prove otherwise, but how these phenomena propagate in the body provides the beacon to trace outcome back to its original action. Proverbs states, “Only simpletons believe everything they are told! The prudent carefully consider their steps.” (Proverbs 14: 15 NLT) Only the Biblical Worldview offers prudent circumspect. But we now find ourselves in the single moment in linear time when the considerations of the prudent can be given objective scientific validation, provided he or she uses both sets of tools.

Both the church and secular science stand at the same crossroad. Both can continue down their respective paths of moralism and pleasure-seeking and allow damaging statistics to escalate. Or we can all humble ourselves and realize that our subjective declarations of unadulterated freedom or moral elitism have allowed the enemy’s agenda to flourish. His target is the humanity that we interact with every day, those that work at our offices, sit next to us at school, pass us at the mall, or sit in the pew next to us. The decision looms: do we cling to our dogmatic moralism, or retreat to our towers of secular science – allowing the malignant fruit of the tree to flourish and prosper for future decades, centuries or millennia? Or do we partner together and take down the tree’s malignant root structure? The time is now, are we ready to scrap our old paradigms to seize it?