Our living life indeed resembles a lit stick. Initially, the fire is weak and easily extinguished, necessitating our careful protection to prevent it from going out. As the fire matures, the log burns strongly and becomes difficult to extinguish. However, towards the end, as it starves for fuel, it becomes frail and eventually dies. Alternatively, a light that runs on other fuels may maintain consistent energy until the fuel depletes, abruptly dying out, much like the Sun or a star that maintains its brightness as long as it has fuel, supplied initially from an eternal source of life or periodically replenished.
Thus, just because we observe a creature or being maintaining consistent vigor does not logically imply they are the eternal Creator or another powerful eternal being worthy of our homage, worship, and sacrifices. The true Creator must embody and demonstrate the essence of justice, fairness, equality, ethics, and wisdom, capable of rendering just and wise judgments and possessing the ability to grant eternal life and create in goodness and wisdom—not the opposite, which is actually an effect of free choice in the opposite direction. This means that although the Creator endowed the initial parents with eternal life, their free choice to disobey introduced death into existence, causing eternal life to be withdrawn back to the Creator due to their decision to separate and break away. Instead of the Creator creating death, which would contradict wisdom and goodness, the Creator brings forth from an essence devoid of death, hate, injustice, unfairness, disorder, and foolishness.
Consider the tree: it produces seeds that propagate from its essence. However, human intervention to alter the seed's genetic structure with poisons produces fruits that deviate from their original goodness. A poisonous plant is not inherently bad; rather, it was beneficial and good for its role until it was altered by subsequent choices or modifications.
Therefore, just as a tree or the sun survives much longer than other creations, it is created with life. However, the initial life fuel supplied does not need to be eternal but is provided in the amount deemed wise and sufficient by the Creator. Thus, when a tree dies, it is logical that nothing can continue to live if not connected to and replenished from the source of eternal life. Certainly, a human can end a tree's life or the Creator can shorten any life simply by withdrawing the source of life. Furthermore, it is not necessary for the Creator to always grant good rewards or eternal life, just as making a fire to last just long enough to cook food does not imply malevolence for not allowing the fire to burn eternally.
Thus, both concepts—light and dark, eternal life and eternal death—are in opposition, each striving to prevail until met with resistance. Those who abide by the Creator should engage those who oppose them in exchanging ideas and opinions, using logic and observed evidence to highlight our sibling nature and essence designed with free will, drawn to offer homage, worship, and abide by the Creator's Design. While we may differ in understanding, our bond as siblings and our respect for our shared origin and the Creator who loves us all encourage us to engage in peaceful, loving discussions to help us make conscious choices. Unfortunately, when violence and threats endanger anyone's life, every individual has the right to protect their own life. Moreover, abuses and harms inflicted upon the weak, frail, young, and innocent, wherever and by whomever, should be universally opposed, just as any injustice and harm should be, regardless of who is harming and who is being harmed.
Furthermore, while the Creator has the capacity to endow all creations with eternal life, we observe that this is not universally manifest, leading us to ponder whether this aligns with justice and wisdom, and whether all creation testifies to the Creator's ultimate goodness. The necessity for contrasts is evident; they aid in making wiser choices. For example, the value of a lit candle is more appreciated in darkness than in a brightly lit room, compelling those with freedom of choice to select it over a dimmer one to navigate a dark path. Thus, by presenting contrasts, the Creator may gift certain beings with shorter lifespans as a means to highlight the pursuit of eternal life.
Moreover, the Creator, after endowing creatures like humans with the capacity for eternal life, may choose to withdraw this gift based on the creatures' conscious decisions to distance themselves or prioritize lesser rewards, contrary to the adherence required by the Creator. It is logical, just, and wise for the Creator to initially grant varying spans of life. This reflects that the Creator's creation of good encompasses beings granted different characteristics or lifespans from the onset—whether deemed desirable or not—the ultimate aim is to attain the treasure of eternal life after death, rendering temporal life goals or other valued qualities as lesser in comparison. Thus, the assertion that everyone will attain eternal life regardless of their life choices contradicts logic, justice, and wisdom. Additionally, to truly appreciate the magnificent value of eternity, the presence of eternal death is necessary as a contrast.
Enforcing adherence to the Creator's Design negates the principle of free choice. A design that endows creatures with the liberty to choose and respond is the essence of Love. Conversely, while the fear of the Creator might compel adherence to the Creator's Design and prompt the requisite homage, worship, and sacrifices, this is not rooted in love but in fear. Although both love for the Creator's Design and fear of punishment might coexist in the choice to comply, love is not inherently present if compliance is solely driven by fear of punishment. If adherence to the Creator’s Design were based only on fear, it would be challenging for the Creator to justly discern those who obey out of fear alone from those genuinely compelled by unconditional love, thus deserving a just and wise reward. However, the freedom to choose allows for sacrificial love for the Creator, enhancing the worthiness of the reward given.
For instance, a child might perform chores out of fear of punishment, thereby earning the agreed-upon reward. Yet, a child who acts out of deep gratitude and love for their parents will likely perform not only the requested chores but also additional unasked tasks. Although the fear of punishment may exist for both children, for the one motivated by genuine love and appreciation, this fear shifts to a fear of losing closeness and the bond with the parents. This child performs duties with gratitude, not as a burden; with ease, not obligation; freely chosen, not forced; joyfully, not begrudgingly; and with love, not resentment.
Similarly, the distinction is significant for the parents, and likewise for the Creator, in rewarding the faithful. Rewarding them not only with the promised eternal life but also sharing in the eternal treasure with love enhances the giver from merely obligatory to genuinely willing, elevating the act of giving to an expression of love.