Because survival is what determines the traits of organisms. It’s not necessarily how much of a good boy you are. That’s why even among humans, a social species, there are psychopaths, rapists, murderers, etc. These traits have been evolutionarily advantageous for a long time, and to some extent, they still are.
That parasite fills a larger role in the ecosystem than you ever will. Drop the obsession with aesthetician you crypto abrahamic midwit
The ecosystem didn’t have to exist as it does, though. God could have made it literally any other way.
how is it not benevolent?
It causes suffering.
He did it for free, you owe everything to Him but will never come close pay enough of it back no matter how hard you try. How is this not benevolent?
God could make your life nothing but suffering. Would you still say the same thing? That he did it for free? Would you get on your knees and thank God for your life of suffering?
He didn't, he originally made it Eden, where no animal ate another and nothing died. But evil has come into the world, and it must die - but nothing can die in a world without death.
So death had to be introduced, and God's creatures reflect that reality so that they can manage in such a world.
Any questions along the lines of "why didn't God-" are answered very quickly at https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YKUhD7--LKw
This was the ideal solution given those factors.
>evil has come into the world
Because God allowed it. Even if we assume that Adam and Eve ate the fruit (which they did in ignorance, which is not their fault), this doesn’t justify why God suddenly re-created the world to operate through a dog-eat-dog evolutionary game. He didn’t have to change the biological behaviors of all animals, or even humans. Did Adam and Eve had urges to rape and murder? No? Then why did their children have these desires? Why didn’t God design every human to be free from sin when they were born? God could have done this, he’s omnipotent.
Define "suffering". That "parasite" is clearly not suffering. >which they did in ignorance >don't eat this fruit >ok >no seriously don't eat it >ok *eats it*
> That "parasite" is clearly not suffering.
Everything suffers, but I literally didn’t even say that the parasite is suffering. I said it CAUSES suffering. You’re not off to a good start. >don't eat this fruit >ok >no seriously don't eat it >ok *eats it*
You’re forgetting the part where they were tricked into thinking that God lied to them. God only said that when they ate the fruit, they shall die. They had no conception of the full consequences of eating the fruit. They were stupid. What the frick was God even trying to test here? Why put the serpent in the garden? Why must all of humanity depend on the actions of two individuals? Are you really telling me that every human suffers because two humans made a dumb decision (because God designed them to be dumb)? How can you take this seriously? Frick this shitty religion. The theory of evolution actually explains the world. Even morality can be explained by the fact that it is advantageous, at least for some social species. Humans aren’t even the only moral creatures in nature. Or the only intelligent creatures. Your religion is ancient mythology when humans knew next to nothing about the world. Your Bible literally says that rainbows were created so God can remind us of a covenant. Now we know that it’s just the refraction of light. How embarrassing. And the fact that God even allows alternative theories (that make more sense) just proves that he WANTS people to be tricked, or that he doesn’t exist. In either cases he is not worthy of worship.
4 weeks ago
Radiochan
God did not trick them. It was the Serpent that did it. Anyway, God said don't eat it, they ate it, they were told not to eat it repeatedly, they ate it anyway, it was their fault.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Without Jesus to tie God's logic to an experience, his instruction was not understood.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
The fruit is like sin. It is easy not to sin, ~90% of the time you literally need to do nothing and ~10% of the time you just have to try. Eve was just being a greedy little c*nt.
If mankind does not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then they will not know if it is good or bad to follow the instructions of God. At the beginning ofncreation, "good and bad" are just noises that God is making. He might as well have said to mankind, "it's bobledub to eat the fruit". Does bibledub mean that I eat it or not? I don't even know what bobledub means. Until we know what the word be good and bad mean, through experience, we don't know how to follow the commands. The choice to follow or not follow is random. Once we make a choice, the reward is revealed. Jesus only needs to die one time to save us from our sin. After that experience, we are now able to follow the instructions we recieve.
4 weeks ago
Radiochan
Why do they need to know if it's "good" or "bad"? They were told not to, that's enough.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
As a father, I can tell you, if you say to a baby, "don't touch that" the baby will touch it. They just see you point at something and make noise. They don't understand the word "don"t" until they associate pain with the word "don't". Just like the color blue. Unless you see blue, how can it ever be explained to you? You only know what "blue" means, because you have experienced it. It's like that with all the words we know. They are all tied to our experience. God is logic, and Jesus is the manifestation of that logic. Without personifying or experiencing logic, it had no purpose. A mathematical equation has no value without cognitively guided instruction. The liberal concept of CGI being taught in schools is just a rebranding of Jesus Christ. It was developed thousands of years ago, and secularists are redefining it, because the wisdom of Jesus Chist resurrects like that. No matter how many times you rebrand the truth, it rises back up.
4 weeks ago
Radiochan
You're a bad father. I knew not to touch things. I did it anyway to be a contrarian butthole. If Adam and Eve were like me then they deserved it and so did all of Mankind.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I knew not to touch things
You don't know until you learn. You learn through experience. It's pretty simple to understand. I'm not sure why you are doubting.
>Because God allowed it.
There are relatively limited circumstances in which God can take direct action in the world. Seriously check out https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YKUhD7--LKw its less than 60 seconds long and illustrates it well
>which they did in ignorance
No they didn't, they were clearly told not to eat it and that they would die if they did so. They knew who God was, what he had told them the fruit would do, and that he didn't want them to eat it. What were they ignorant of?
>this doesn’t justify why God suddenly re-created the world to operate through a dog-eat-dog evolutionary game
It really does; suppose for instance that before this no creature had an immune system since no germs would ever try to consume them. Now that we're in a world with death and decay, we need a way for our bodies to not just all immediately decay like corpses do. So you've gotta add immune systems.
Then you have to find balance other ways. Make plants not resistant enough and they'll all just get eaten in a tide of insects and rodents, so you need things like thorns and poisons to slow that. Even then there can be too many so you need things like spiders to prevent too many flies and cats to prevent too many rats.
>had urges to rape and murder? No? Then why did their children have these desires?
Most people go their whole lives without raping or murdering a single person, and generally speaking people are wired to be strongly against something like that. Your conscience starts to scream at you if you even think of doing somethinn like that. Im Eden they disobeyed God, many also disobey their conscience when it tells them something is wrong
>God could have done this, he’s omnipotent.
God being omnipotent is, interestingly, exactly what keeps him from making the world exactly as he wants it to be because of paradoxes involving infinity that his omnipotence allows for. No possible world is the world God wants since he always wants the world to be better.
> Now that we're in a world with death and decay, we need a way for our bodies to not just all immediately decay like corpses do. So you've gotta add immune systems.
How the frick does eating a fruit suddenly cause death and decay to exist in the world? You know that Adam and Eve were eating BEFORE they ate the magic fruit, right? So were plants magically regenerating fruit and vegetables? What about all the organisms that are carnivores, parasites, etc.? Did they exist before the fall or did God have to create them afterwards? Why didn’t God allow every single human (and animal) to make the choice themselves? Why must we suffer the consequences of the actions of someone else? Bronze Age mythology is a joke
4 weeks ago
Third Poster
>How the frick does eating a fruit suddenly cause death and decay to exist in the world?
You sound much like a caveman might if you were showing his tribe a nuclear reactor to warm and light their cave and said "Now this is very important, in here are some metal rods, they have to be here but DO NOT take them out or you WILL die". He might say "pfft how can moving a rod kill people" and do it anyway P:
>You know that Adam and Eve were eating BEFORE they ate the magic fruit, right?
"Grug has moved many rods and Grug no die, why not move this rod?"
>So were plants magically regenerating fruit and vegetables?
W...
Anon...did...did you just describe plants growing as "magically regenerating"?
>What about all the organisms that are carnivores, parasites, etc.? Did they exist before the fall or did God have to create them afterwards?
Plants and animals were modified afterwards as Genesis says
>Why didn’t God allow every single human (and animal) to make the choice themselves?
He does
Either way, evil is in the world though. And that means death and destruction have to be, so that evil can die and be destroyed.
>Why must we suffer the consequences of the actions of someone else?
That's simply the physical reality of the world. If I pull a control rod out of your local nuclear reactor you'll suffer for it simply by the physical mechanics of the thing. The Tree of Knowing Good and Evil wasn't really any different. Death and decay are the equivalent of nuclear waste cleanup.
He didn't, he originally made it Eden, where no animal ate another and nothing died. But evil has come into the world, and it must die - but nothing can die in a world without death.
So death had to be introduced, and God's creatures reflect that reality so that they can manage in such a world.
Any questions along the lines of "why didn't God-" are answered very quickly at https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YKUhD7--LKw
This was the ideal solution given those factors.
Adam and Eve caused it. Disobedience takes away blessings and causes curses. Parents also mimic this. I'm sure you got your toys and privileges taken away plenty of times as a youth who didn't do as mom or dad said.
And I'm sure thorns growing on something as lovely as a rose is the result of this curse as well. The same as animals needing to devour other animals to survive. Fortunately, Jesus said that even the most fiercest animals will be eating hay and grass alongside one another in Heaven, according to Isaiah 65:25.
I can’t wait until humans have evolved to no longer be morons who believe in this nonsense. Arguing with them is a waste of time. It’s like trying to argue with ancient pagans or animists or believers in Zeus. One day they will see.
Yes because it is harmful to the human mentally and even physically. Not because "Oh the poor poochie coochie"
I always find it hilarious you vegans immediately go to the "torture" argument when it is a false equivalence just like how comparing any animal to man. Man is superior to any mere beast of the land. Period.
Never heard of how serial killers start off torturing and killing animals huh?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
That’s not an argument. A vegan would say that the serial killer tortures animals because the serial killer is immoral. But you haven’t yet explained why torturing animals is immoral. You just said that it harms the human. But why would that be the case?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Harming animals out of sadistic pleasure is wrong because it damages your mentality not because an animal is harmed. >Morality
Oh you want a religious argument, none from me. However there is a correlation between those who torture animals out of sadistic sadism and their disrupted mental status living in a society. Obviously a society doesn't want someone going around torturing their property and eventually other members of society.
Same with bestiality. It violates natural law and is a detriment to people's mentality.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
> Harming animals out of sadistic pleasure is wrong because it damages your mentality
For the THIRD (3rd) time, why does it damage someone’s mentality? You’re going in circles.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Why does fire burn you? >Because it is hot >BUT WHY?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
The problem is that you haven’t actually given the “because it’s hot” response. I asked here
Why would it harm humans to torture animals?
here
That’s not an argument. A vegan would say that the serial killer tortures animals because the serial killer is immoral. But you haven’t yet explained why torturing animals is immoral. You just said that it harms the human. But why would that be the case?
and here
> Harming animals out of sadistic pleasure is wrong because it damages your mentality
For the THIRD (3rd) time, why does it damage someone’s mentality? You’re going in circles.
and you have yet to explain why. You said that morality does not apply to animals. Why is it that destroying sticks and rocks doesn’t harm humans mentally, but torturing animals does?
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Why is it that destroying sticks and rocks doesn’t harm humans.
Because an animal is alive, sticks and rocks aren't.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
and… why does that matter? You said that morality does not apply to animals.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes. An animal doesn't have morals so morals do not apply to them, this has no correlation to how individuals react to gore.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
If morality doesn’t apply to them then torturing them shouldn’t matter. The fact that it does matter seems to indicate that your assumption is wrong. Morality does apply to animals in some degree.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes it does since it is harmful to human mentality. Again it causes people to see torture as normal and they may switch to humans which is harmful to society. You sounds like you just want an excuse to torture animals. Just because we are superior to animals in every way doesn't mean we should cause them harm "just because". >Morality does apply to animals in some degree
The word you are looking for is respect not morality.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
So is destroying rocks and sticks bad because it might make someone want to destroy humans? Or human property?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Can you prove destroying rocks and sticks can cause people to destroy humans or property?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
False equivalence. Rocks are not alive so blowing up a rock has nothing to do with causing brain trauma unless you are talking about using explosives can cause injuries to the brain and that can make people violent.
When God asks questions in the garden like, "where are you?" and "what have you done?". These are not questions that God is asking for his own benefit. God is saying, "look at where you are now". "Look at what you did". In other words, self reflect on the choice you made, and behold the experience so that you can follow commands correctly, and tie them to your experience for judgement.
by what standard would you judge it "amoral"?
By the I'm an in incel and everyone is ahead except me standard
Because survival is what determines the traits of organisms. It’s not necessarily how much of a good boy you are. That’s why even among humans, a social species, there are psychopaths, rapists, murderers, etc. These traits have been evolutionarily advantageous for a long time, and to some extent, they still are.
The ecosystem didn’t have to exist as it does, though. God could have made it literally any other way.
It causes suffering.
God could make your life nothing but suffering. Would you still say the same thing? That he did it for free? Would you get on your knees and thank God for your life of suffering?
>evil has come into the world
Because God allowed it. Even if we assume that Adam and Eve ate the fruit (which they did in ignorance, which is not their fault), this doesn’t justify why God suddenly re-created the world to operate through a dog-eat-dog evolutionary game. He didn’t have to change the biological behaviors of all animals, or even humans. Did Adam and Eve had urges to rape and murder? No? Then why did their children have these desires? Why didn’t God design every human to be free from sin when they were born? God could have done this, he’s omnipotent.
Define "suffering". That "parasite" is clearly not suffering.
>which they did in ignorance
>don't eat this fruit
>ok
>no seriously don't eat it
>ok *eats it*
> That "parasite" is clearly not suffering.
Everything suffers, but I literally didn’t even say that the parasite is suffering. I said it CAUSES suffering. You’re not off to a good start.
>don't eat this fruit
>ok
>no seriously don't eat it
>ok *eats it*
You’re forgetting the part where they were tricked into thinking that God lied to them. God only said that when they ate the fruit, they shall die. They had no conception of the full consequences of eating the fruit. They were stupid. What the frick was God even trying to test here? Why put the serpent in the garden? Why must all of humanity depend on the actions of two individuals? Are you really telling me that every human suffers because two humans made a dumb decision (because God designed them to be dumb)? How can you take this seriously? Frick this shitty religion. The theory of evolution actually explains the world. Even morality can be explained by the fact that it is advantageous, at least for some social species. Humans aren’t even the only moral creatures in nature. Or the only intelligent creatures. Your religion is ancient mythology when humans knew next to nothing about the world. Your Bible literally says that rainbows were created so God can remind us of a covenant. Now we know that it’s just the refraction of light. How embarrassing. And the fact that God even allows alternative theories (that make more sense) just proves that he WANTS people to be tricked, or that he doesn’t exist. In either cases he is not worthy of worship.
God did not trick them. It was the Serpent that did it. Anyway, God said don't eat it, they ate it, they were told not to eat it repeatedly, they ate it anyway, it was their fault.
Without Jesus to tie God's logic to an experience, his instruction was not understood.
The fruit is like sin. It is easy not to sin, ~90% of the time you literally need to do nothing and ~10% of the time you just have to try. Eve was just being a greedy little c*nt.
If mankind does not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then they will not know if it is good or bad to follow the instructions of God. At the beginning ofncreation, "good and bad" are just noises that God is making. He might as well have said to mankind, "it's bobledub to eat the fruit". Does bibledub mean that I eat it or not? I don't even know what bobledub means. Until we know what the word be good and bad mean, through experience, we don't know how to follow the commands. The choice to follow or not follow is random. Once we make a choice, the reward is revealed. Jesus only needs to die one time to save us from our sin. After that experience, we are now able to follow the instructions we recieve.
Why do they need to know if it's "good" or "bad"? They were told not to, that's enough.
As a father, I can tell you, if you say to a baby, "don't touch that" the baby will touch it. They just see you point at something and make noise. They don't understand the word "don"t" until they associate pain with the word "don't". Just like the color blue. Unless you see blue, how can it ever be explained to you? You only know what "blue" means, because you have experienced it. It's like that with all the words we know. They are all tied to our experience. God is logic, and Jesus is the manifestation of that logic. Without personifying or experiencing logic, it had no purpose. A mathematical equation has no value without cognitively guided instruction. The liberal concept of CGI being taught in schools is just a rebranding of Jesus Christ. It was developed thousands of years ago, and secularists are redefining it, because the wisdom of Jesus Chist resurrects like that. No matter how many times you rebrand the truth, it rises back up.
You're a bad father. I knew not to touch things. I did it anyway to be a contrarian butthole. If Adam and Eve were like me then they deserved it and so did all of Mankind.
>I knew not to touch things
You don't know until you learn. You learn through experience. It's pretty simple to understand. I'm not sure why you are doubting.
>Because God allowed it.
There are relatively limited circumstances in which God can take direct action in the world. Seriously check out https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YKUhD7--LKw its less than 60 seconds long and illustrates it well
>which they did in ignorance
No they didn't, they were clearly told not to eat it and that they would die if they did so. They knew who God was, what he had told them the fruit would do, and that he didn't want them to eat it. What were they ignorant of?
>this doesn’t justify why God suddenly re-created the world to operate through a dog-eat-dog evolutionary game
It really does; suppose for instance that before this no creature had an immune system since no germs would ever try to consume them. Now that we're in a world with death and decay, we need a way for our bodies to not just all immediately decay like corpses do. So you've gotta add immune systems.
Then you have to find balance other ways. Make plants not resistant enough and they'll all just get eaten in a tide of insects and rodents, so you need things like thorns and poisons to slow that. Even then there can be too many so you need things like spiders to prevent too many flies and cats to prevent too many rats.
>had urges to rape and murder? No? Then why did their children have these desires?
Most people go their whole lives without raping or murdering a single person, and generally speaking people are wired to be strongly against something like that. Your conscience starts to scream at you if you even think of doing somethinn like that. Im Eden they disobeyed God, many also disobey their conscience when it tells them something is wrong
>God could have done this, he’s omnipotent.
God being omnipotent is, interestingly, exactly what keeps him from making the world exactly as he wants it to be because of paradoxes involving infinity that his omnipotence allows for. No possible world is the world God wants since he always wants the world to be better.
Whoops sorry had the wrong name on from another thread
I wish this board had IDs
> Now that we're in a world with death and decay, we need a way for our bodies to not just all immediately decay like corpses do. So you've gotta add immune systems.
How the frick does eating a fruit suddenly cause death and decay to exist in the world? You know that Adam and Eve were eating BEFORE they ate the magic fruit, right? So were plants magically regenerating fruit and vegetables? What about all the organisms that are carnivores, parasites, etc.? Did they exist before the fall or did God have to create them afterwards? Why didn’t God allow every single human (and animal) to make the choice themselves? Why must we suffer the consequences of the actions of someone else? Bronze Age mythology is a joke
>How the frick does eating a fruit suddenly cause death and decay to exist in the world?
You sound much like a caveman might if you were showing his tribe a nuclear reactor to warm and light their cave and said "Now this is very important, in here are some metal rods, they have to be here but DO NOT take them out or you WILL die". He might say "pfft how can moving a rod kill people" and do it anyway P:
>You know that Adam and Eve were eating BEFORE they ate the magic fruit, right?
"Grug has moved many rods and Grug no die, why not move this rod?"
>So were plants magically regenerating fruit and vegetables?
W...
Anon...did...did you just describe plants growing as "magically regenerating"?
>What about all the organisms that are carnivores, parasites, etc.? Did they exist before the fall or did God have to create them afterwards?
Plants and animals were modified afterwards as Genesis says
>Why didn’t God allow every single human (and animal) to make the choice themselves?
He does
Either way, evil is in the world though. And that means death and destruction have to be, so that evil can die and be destroyed.
>Why must we suffer the consequences of the actions of someone else?
That's simply the physical reality of the world. If I pull a control rod out of your local nuclear reactor you'll suffer for it simply by the physical mechanics of the thing. The Tree of Knowing Good and Evil wasn't really any different. Death and decay are the equivalent of nuclear waste cleanup.
Suffering isn't inherently bad you mong.
and yet hell is defined as a place of suffering
Irrelevant. Especially since Hell isn't real and suffering can be as beneficial as it is debilitating.
That parasite fills a larger role in the ecosystem than you ever will. Drop the obsession with aesthetician you crypto abrahamic midwit
how is it not benevolent?
He did it for free, you owe everything to Him but will never come close pay enough of it back no matter how hard you try. How is this not benevolent?
He didn't, he originally made it Eden, where no animal ate another and nothing died. But evil has come into the world, and it must die - but nothing can die in a world without death.
So death had to be introduced, and God's creatures reflect that reality so that they can manage in such a world.
Any questions along the lines of "why didn't God-" are answered very quickly at https://www.youtube.com/shorts/YKUhD7--LKw
This was the ideal solution given those factors.
Except that none of that happened and life has been in constant competition from the very start
Adam and Eve caused it. Disobedience takes away blessings and causes curses. Parents also mimic this. I'm sure you got your toys and privileges taken away plenty of times as a youth who didn't do as mom or dad said.
And I'm sure thorns growing on something as lovely as a rose is the result of this curse as well. The same as animals needing to devour other animals to survive. Fortunately, Jesus said that even the most fiercest animals will be eating hay and grass alongside one another in Heaven, according to Isaiah 65:25.
Who is in the wrong here?
No one, since both are playing their role in the ecosystem.
I can’t wait until humans have evolved to no longer be morons who believe in this nonsense. Arguing with them is a waste of time. It’s like trying to argue with ancient pagans or animists or believers in Zeus. One day they will see.
>it's amoral because its not convenient to me, personally
So all morality exists in relation to your preferences? Got it, lol
Remember eating meat isn't morally wrong since morals do not apply to animals.
Is torturing animals wrong? How about bestiality?
Yes because it is harmful to the human mentally and even physically. Not because "Oh the poor poochie coochie"
I always find it hilarious you vegans immediately go to the "torture" argument when it is a false equivalence just like how comparing any animal to man. Man is superior to any mere beast of the land. Period.
Who said I'm a vegan? I eat meat all the time. Just wanted to understand your conception of right and wrong further.
Why would it harm humans to torture animals?
Never heard of how serial killers start off torturing and killing animals huh?
That’s not an argument. A vegan would say that the serial killer tortures animals because the serial killer is immoral. But you haven’t yet explained why torturing animals is immoral. You just said that it harms the human. But why would that be the case?
Harming animals out of sadistic pleasure is wrong because it damages your mentality not because an animal is harmed.
>Morality
Oh you want a religious argument, none from me. However there is a correlation between those who torture animals out of sadistic sadism and their disrupted mental status living in a society. Obviously a society doesn't want someone going around torturing their property and eventually other members of society.
Same with bestiality. It violates natural law and is a detriment to people's mentality.
> Harming animals out of sadistic pleasure is wrong because it damages your mentality
For the THIRD (3rd) time, why does it damage someone’s mentality? You’re going in circles.
>Why does fire burn you?
>Because it is hot
>BUT WHY?
The problem is that you haven’t actually given the “because it’s hot” response. I asked here
here
and here
and you have yet to explain why. You said that morality does not apply to animals. Why is it that destroying sticks and rocks doesn’t harm humans mentally, but torturing animals does?
>Why is it that destroying sticks and rocks doesn’t harm humans.
Because an animal is alive, sticks and rocks aren't.
and… why does that matter? You said that morality does not apply to animals.
Yes. An animal doesn't have morals so morals do not apply to them, this has no correlation to how individuals react to gore.
If morality doesn’t apply to them then torturing them shouldn’t matter. The fact that it does matter seems to indicate that your assumption is wrong. Morality does apply to animals in some degree.
Yes it does since it is harmful to human mentality. Again it causes people to see torture as normal and they may switch to humans which is harmful to society. You sounds like you just want an excuse to torture animals. Just because we are superior to animals in every way doesn't mean we should cause them harm "just because".
>Morality does apply to animals in some degree
The word you are looking for is respect not morality.
So is destroying rocks and sticks bad because it might make someone want to destroy humans? Or human property?
Can you prove destroying rocks and sticks can cause people to destroy humans or property?
False equivalence. Rocks are not alive so blowing up a rock has nothing to do with causing brain trauma unless you are talking about using explosives can cause injuries to the brain and that can make people violent.
When God asks questions in the garden like, "where are you?" and "what have you done?". These are not questions that God is asking for his own benefit. God is saying, "look at where you are now". "Look at what you did". In other words, self reflect on the choice you made, and behold the experience so that you can follow commands correctly, and tie them to your experience for judgement.
Thr abrahamic god is ehriman, and thus evil incarnate. Abandon abrahamism, embrace Zoroastrianism