Why is sloth a sin?

[sserafim]

Why is sloth a sin? What's so bad about being lazy? Why are we expected to be productive and do something? Why should we even have to do anything?

 

[TheGoodGuy]

Yeah, we are forced into a life and expecting to work hard to provide for a life we never consented to and if we don´t we suffer the torture of starvation, dehydration or the elements (from lack of housing). I think and this seems very radical to some that we at least should have a nice high universal basic income so we at least can cope with this life we never even consented to in the first place.

 

[Celerity]

My take is that none of us are an island. If you are lazy for too long, someone has to pick up the slack. Someone somewhere has to work to provide food and the other essentials to you. So, by being lazy, you don't contribute to society and could be deemed a "useless eater" by people like the Nazis.

That said, the question of what sloth looks like when you're self-sufficient would be complicated. In such a case, I'm not sure how sloth could be considered a vice as it does no harm except maybe to yourself, which would then be a sin against God in this line of thinking.

 

[sserafim]

My take is that none of us are an island. If you are lazy for too long, someone has to pick up the slack. Someone somewhere has to work to provide food and the other essentials to you. So, by being lazy, you don't contribute to society and could be deemed a "useless eater" by people like the Nazis.

That said, the question of what sloth looks like when you're self-sufficient would be complicated. In such a case, I'm not sure how sloth could be considered a vice as it does no harm except maybe to yourself, which would then be a sin against God in this line of thinking.

Why should we have to contribute to society though? Why are we obligated to?

I don't think that sloth does any harm. I honestly think that "sloth" is just rest. People should be able to rest and recuperate if they're tired.

 

[Celerity]

Why should we have to contribute to society though? Why are we obligated to?

I don't think that sloth does any harm. I honestly think that "sloth" is just rest. People should be able to rest and recuperate if they're tired.

By the same logic, no one is obligated to take care of you. Unless you are independently wealthy, this will become an uncomfortable existence rather quickly.

Resting and recuperating is also not what I would call slothful, but I agree that our society is obsessed with productivity to an unhealthy degree.

 

[sserafim]

My take is that none of us are an island. If you are lazy for too long, someone has to pick up the slack. Someone somewhere has to work to provide food and the other essentials to you. So, by being lazy, you don't contribute to society and could be deemed a "useless eater" by people like the Nazis.

That said, the question of what sloth looks like when you're self-sufficient would be complicated. In such a case, I'm not sure how sloth could be considered a vice as it does no harm except maybe to yourself, which would then be a sin against God in this line of thinking.

Btw, I'm neurodivergent (Asperger's/autism, ADHD, social anxiety) so they would probably call and classify me as a "useless eater" anyways.

 

[R_N]

My take is that none of us are an island. If you are lazy for too long, someone has to pick up the slack. Someone somewhere has to work to provide food and the other essentials to you. So, by being lazy, you don't contribute to society and could be deemed a "useless eater" by people like the Nazis.

That said, the question of what sloth looks like when you're self-sufficient would be complicated. In such a case, I'm not sure how sloth could be considered a vice as it does no harm except maybe to yourself, which would then be a sin against God in this line of thinking.

Isn't God a sloth? I don't think hes doing anything atm.

 

[Rhizomorph1]

Why is sloth a sin? What's so bad about being lazy? Why are we expected to be productive and do something? Why should we even have to do anything?

Maybe because god hates people that don't fit into the protestant work ethic (i.e., chronically fatigued, mentally ill, marginalized people)?

I'm being cynically facetious but in all honesty productivity and "laziness" are both morally neutral. It is considered deviant because of punitive-coercive social norms that are taken for granted in a one-dimensional mechanistic capitalist society. These norms are assumed to be "good" because good and evil are usually codified through what we intuitively and socially perform in our day-to-day lives without a deeper philosophical analysis of realistically virtuous behaviour.

Isn't God a sloth? I don't think hes doing anything atm.

 

[Forever Sleep]

Whether you believe they are from God or not, commandments and sins picked out things that didn't help us live as harmonious communities. Obviously, people going around killing or stealing from one another, or sleeping with other people's partners isn't going to make for a good community.

I guess sloth is a problem because that person has to be carried by everyone else. I guess in terms of self fulfilment too- if you believe that can make someone feel happy- someone who doesn't even try is never going to feel that.

I'd say sloth/lazyness is different to rest though. People rest because they are tired from doing something- working. That isn't sloth. That's surely just taking a break. Even God took a break on Sunday!

Overall though- I get your point and I agree with it to an extent. I hate the way society, our parents, our familes guilt trip us into being productive. Ultimately- we're all working to make rich people richer and our parents birthed us into this wage slavery.

There again- do I enjoy paying taxes to support people I don't know? Are all of them in a worse position than me? When I worked in retail full time, one lady there purposefully only worked part time because, doing more hours would disqualify her for benefits and that money was better. I don't blame her- I hated that job too but- it didn't feel fair. She could have done more- she said so herself but- why would she?

Personally, I don't much enjoy complying to all this. In many ways, I have actually rebelled. I'm incredibly lazy when it comes to housework because it's only me who has to put up with the mess. Earning a living is different though. I don't get much choice there. It's the main reason I want out. I'm sick of towing the line. In the words of the late great David Bowie: 'Life wasn't worth the balance.'

 

[WAITING TO DIE]

It's religious bullshit as per usual condemning sloth as a sin.
Yet, I think it's mostly drilled into us at those brainwashing academies called schools that laziness is not to be tolerated.
They do this to condition us for a lifetime of wage - slavery.

 

[username8888]

I don't think that sloth does any harm. I honestly think that "sloth" is just rest.

I think we are working, or interacting more work nowadays than per-industrial feudal people. Which is weird.
The factories that people created would have decreased the working hours. But instead, we are working more than ever.

 

[R_N]

I am sure most of us are not lazy in true sense of the word btw. We are just in prison.

I still feel good fixing stuff on my own or helping around. I would be more productive if society didn't judge me for everything. And modern 9 to 5 jobs just feel souless and full of toxicity in interactions. There is no respect among coworkers etc. Who would work in that environment?

 

[Celerity]

Isn't God a sloth? I don't think hes doing anything atm.

God is by definition perfect. Sin doesn't apply. I am an atheist, just presenting the theist view here as I see it.

 

[tiger b]

God is by definition perfect. Sin doesn't apply. I am an atheist, just presenting the theist view here as I see it.

Well said. As someone who believes in God, it's amazing how much of the basic, obvious things are contradicted by illogical reasoning, often for means of shaping society.

 

[R_N]

God is by definition perfect. Sin doesn't apply. I am an atheist, just presenting the theist view here as I see it.

Well, he would be a perfect sloth to me. Self sufficient and almighty but still not willing to lift a finger.

I wish I could also call humans sinful while being like him. I am not sure I would want them to worship me tho. I would be a bad role model when it comes to sloth thing at least.

Still, we are created in his image, some would say...

 

[theslasher]

Why is sloth a sin? What's so bad about being lazy? Why are we expected to be productive and do something? Why should we even have to do anything?

Well, the Bible is not a literal interpretation of reality. Sure there are some historical events that took place in it, but overall it is far from the literal truth. Many of the stories in the Bible are metaphorical, not literal and their main goal is to teach lessons. Some of these lessons are good, but also some of the things in the Bible are completely immoral and exist only for the benefit of those who wrote it and for the spread of Christianity. It was also obviously rewritten multiple times and since most people were illiterate back then, only those in power were able to interpret it, and they changed it to match their objectives.

Most people just went ahead and believed whatever they were told. They were told not taught how to think, they were taught what to think.

Keep in mind, the Bible was also used during the development of the United States when the slaves were converted into Christians. They used the Bible to convince the slaves to think, "Oh yeah, as long as I'm obedient in this life then eventually I'll be rewarded after I die and go to Heaven!" But it's just a classic example of a carrot being dangled on a stick. It was a way of keeping them obedient and docile, yet also hardworking. It uses fear & punishment and anticipation of reward to influence the behavior of others for their benefit.

There is no literal existence of "sin" it's just an abstract concept that was invented by Homo Sapiens as we developed language and invented religion because our brains were to smooth to even comprehend existence without some sky daddy.

 

[Rogue Proxy]

Isn't God a sloth? I don't think hes doing anything atm.

 

[Zegers]

illogical reasoning

Is there anything more illogical than "God"? you can believe in god as someone believes in cupcakes, its the same.

 

[tiger b]

Is there anything more illogical than "God"? you can believe in god as someone believes in cupcakes, its the same.

Not really.

God is nothingness. God is a very logical step.

If you want to substitute cupcakes as a proxy god, so what. Many do substitute and they call it religion. It's just passing time.

Disagree - that's fine. Maybe you were expecting a sermon. I'd rather listen to a cupcake than a sermon, myself.

 

[theslasher]

Well said. As someone who believes in God, it's amazing how much of the basic, obvious things are contradicted by illogical reasoning, often for means of shaping society.

Yeah, I'm an atheist but I will say that believing in God without falling into the trap of religion and all of its superstitions is pretty based.

 

[R_N]

Yeah, I'm an atheist but I will say that believing in God without falling into the trap of religion and all of its superstitions is pretty based.

Why do you consider it based if you don't mind me asking?

 

[theslasher]

Why do you consider it based if you don't mind me asking?

No problem. That's a decent question.

First off, religion offers an impossibly narrow frame of thought. It contradicts itself in a million ways and to believe in it would be purely paradoxical. The belief in a higher power does not exclusively require someone to follow a specific religion. Anyone is perfectly allowed to believe in a higher consciousness if they wish to do so, as it's quite hard to prove, or disprove, the existence of a god. Now me personally, I see zero reason to believe in a higher consciousness. Because at least in my view, consciousness does not exist outside of the brain (or without the presence of neurons).. But, there's a small possibility where that's not the truth and I'd gladly listen to opposing viewpoints. That's the thing about science. It humbly admits that there are things we do not know for certain. And as we experiment, make new discovers, and try new things, our viewpoints may change & evolve too.

However, religion is the exact opposite. Religion arrogantly claims to have an answer for everything. Faith is literally the belief in something without proof. People may bring up "anecdotal evidence" or they may quote the bible... but the bible is an anecdote. And anecdotes are notoriously the worst form of evidence. Sure there are some historical events in the bible, but that doesn't suggest that the fairytales within it are also true. And as I said before religion is filled with so many contradictions that it'd be a contradiction to believe in it in the first place. On top of that, there are over 4000 religions, yet people have the arrogance to claim their religion is the "special one", and "everyone who doesn't believe what they believe will burn forever". There's the sense of superiority between religions. Religious ideologies are cult like in their very nature. I could go on, but you probably understand the absurdity of their sheeplike and narrow thinking patterns.

Now anyone who believes in a god without confining themselves to one ideology proves that they can at least think for themselves. Whether or not they are right, we cannot say for certain. But at least they are not a sheep. They can at least see past the ridiculousness of religion itself. And as I said earlier, belief in a higher power does not necessarily mean you must follow an ideology that someone else created. Now me personally, I believe in a "god" just as much as I believe in flying rainbow unicorns... it's impossible to prove they do not exist, but also impossible to prove they do exist. That being said, someone who decides to believe in a god (without the narrow ideology of a religion) can at least acknowledge the absurdity of religion in and of itself, they can think for themselves, they can come to their own conclusions, which is why in a roundabout way (whether I share the same beliefs of the supernatural as them or not) they are still based.

 

[tiger b]

In an infinite universe (if it is that way), with infinite possibilities, it would be a little presumptions to not believe in any possibility of flying rainbow unicorns I don't see that it matters really. It's only form.

 

[R_N]

In an infinite universe (if it is that way), with infinite possibilities, it would be a little presumptions to not believe in any possibility of flying rainbow unicorns I don't see that it matters really. It's only form.

Everything can exist then by that logic. I think all concepts from humans come from our flawed brain, hence believing in them would be very naive. Only thing I can believe somewhat is biology and how human body works but not all of that either. Believing myself completely would also be naive since I am a robot.

The only thing closest to truth might be complete silence, because when our brains cook we only get shit for dinner.

 

[tiger b]

Of course it could, by that logic.

I think the real problem would be convincing flying rainbow unicorns that humans exist. A 'highlights' package of the history and behaviour of a supposedly intelligent human species would be dismissed as shock horror. I guess the equine mind could be flawed, too.

I'm a tiger so what do I know anyway.

 

[Spiritual survivor]

In the Bible, sloth is not merely an act but a state of mind. When speaking about spiritual slothfulness, we are referring to the lack of passion and desire for the things of God. It's a spiritual condition that manifests in several ways, such as indifference, negligence, and lack of enthusiasm in fulfilling God's commands. This can be seen through a lack of prayer life, Bible study, and church attendance. Spiritually lazy people may also neglect spiritual disciplines such as fasting and meditation in their spiritual lives.

A slothful person is unwilling to act or care, especially when action and care are needed. Sloth, in the Bible, is considered a sin because it rejects God's gift of time and the opportunities He provides us to grow in virtue, serve others, and, ultimately, love Him.

Sloth is a complex concept that goes beyond physical inactivity. It is about the state of the heart and mind. It's a spiritual and mental laziness that leads to indifference towards God's commandments and a lack of love for God and fellow human beings. We must understand that sloth isn't merely about being idle or lazy; it's about a lack of spiritual hunger, a cold heart towards God, and an indifference towards our spiritual responsibilities.

Side note: fasting is not required in this period, maybe it was at one time in the Old Testament period, but animal sacrifice, water baptism, fasting, these things are for before Jesus died for us. It was a different administration period that does not apply to the people alive today. I'm not sure what they mean by meditation but, prayer is still a thing, and church attendance: depends if the church u go to wether it's a private home based fellowship or a formal church, only if they properly teach u. Many churches might not teach the scripture correctly, having people thinking Jesus is God for example. So just going to a church doesn't mean u will be taught correctly about God and the truth about what the Bible verses mean.

 

[53 Huffy A-Ride]

Why should we have to contribute to society though? Why are we obligated to?

I don't think that sloth does any harm. I honestly think that "sloth" is just rest. People should be able to rest and recuperate if they're tired.

Why?
You are forced to participate in life simply by being, and human nature is a communal one. Up until modern times, it was far more realistic to expect that at some point in your life, youd be contributing in some way to the advancement of your race - whether that meant through being a settler during expansion, partaking in manifest destiny, fighting in wars that directly threatened to extinguish your way of life back home, or just in general being able to more tangibly see the detrimental/positive effects of simply your existence as it impacted your community because of how massively scaled back and less complex things were, almost exclusively due to the absence of technology yet. Even religion had a different purpose back then - it was the centerpiece/unifier of communities and existed as the unofficial moral guidelines/rulebook when it comes to creating communities that could prosper.
Things are much, much different today, and I've got really 2 main things to point out:
1.) "Born too early to explore the stars, born too late to explore the earth. Born just in time to craft your perfect AI catgirl waifu." The first sentence is a legitimate quote, the second adds modern context lol. What I'm saying here has more or less been stated in the previous paragraph - we dont have the same opportunities to contribute to the advancement of our race that our forefathers did. The world is completely figured out, everything is already owned, there really is no land left for expansion, and finally, we have evolved to my next point:
2.) Survival of the fittest has been phased out entirely at this point. At least in the states and pretty much the rest of the developed world. What i mean by that is, its kinda not even possible to fail anymore. Or, at least, you REALLY dont have to worry about never having a roof over your head or some form of food in your belly. I have seen so many people just r**e the system to get on welfare, food stamps, and get into no-income housing when in all reality they were just being lazy or clinging to a "disability" that is reallllllly just an inconvenience at the end of the day, and they are more than able to work still. You can COMPLETELY fail in the modern day and you more than likely will still be given shelter and food by the govt/charity orgs.
Many people subconsciously take these 2 points, regardless of being able to articulate them in the same manner, and just kinda.... give up. And who can blame them? It's harder than ever to succeed as a young person just starting out in life, and why would you bother to try so hard and risk so much and maybe encounter failure (a necessity to build resilience and strength btw) when you can just give up from the start and have your new uncle sam mommy keep taking care of you.
It is worth noting that i very much believe in those welfare systems for those who legitimately need it.

Now that that's been said, ill answer you more directly: because people who just give up right away are massive burdons to society. They were far more noticeable in their detrimental societal impacts when communities back in the day were much much smaller and not behind screens. You would immediately notice the non-contributor. Now, its almost impossible to notice when someone is failing to contribute because there are so damn many of us across so damn many more communities, with everyone now belonging to multiple communitieson top of that. It wasnt like that in the past (think tech/SM bringing us together). The concept of sloth was created back then to keep people's moral compasses good while they lived their lives moreso to survive than thrive, unlike us. Now, we live in an age where you really can pursue mostly whatever you want, and there's no risk of famine/death when you fail, so its doubly pathetic when people say "why is being lazy so bad?" Because dude, you live in the most free and highest-quality-of-life period in all of history so far, and you still fail to see that you can basically do anything without significant repurcussion because of it?

Regarding the smaller communities stuff: there is a verrrrrrry well investigated concept in psychology about how our abilities to communicate and govern go out the window as soon as our tribe sizes [think modern companies with many employees] exceed numbers as small as 100-150 people.


Sorry for the long reply, but between this answer and what @Spiritual survivor said, there's your true answer to that rather deep yet simple question.

No problem. That's a decent question.

First off, religion offers an impossibly narrow frame of thought. It contradicts itself in a million ways and to believe in it would be purely paradoxical. The belief in a higher power does not exclusively require someone to follow a specific religion. Anyone is perfectly allowed to believe in a higher consciousness if they wish to do so, as it's quite hard to prove, or disprove, the existence of a god. Now me personally, I see zero reason to believe in a higher consciousness. Because at least in my view, consciousness does not exist outside of the brain (or without the presence of neurons).. But, there's a small possibility where that's not the truth and I'd gladly listen to opposing viewpoints. That's the thing about science. It humbly admits that there are things we do not know for certain. And as we experiment, make new discovers, and try new things, our viewpoints may change & evolve too.

However, religion is the exact opposite. Religion arrogantly claims to have an answer for everything. Faith is literally the belief in something without proof. People may bring up "anecdotal evidence" or they may quote the bible... but the bible is an anecdote. And anecdotes are notoriously the worst form of evidence. Sure there are some historical events in the bible, but that doesn't suggest that the fairytales within it are also true. And as I said before religion is filled with so many contradictions that it'd be a contradiction to believe in it in the first place. On top of that, there are over 4000 religions, yet people have the arrogance to claim their religion is the "special one", and "everyone who doesn't believe what they believe will burn forever". There's the sense of superiority between religions. Religious ideologies are cult like in their very nature. I could go on, but you probably understand the absurdity of their sheeplike and narrow thinking patterns.

Now anyone who believes in a god without confining themselves to one ideology proves that they can at least think for themselves. Whether or not they are right, we cannot say for certain. But at least they are not a sheep. They can at least see past the ridiculousness of religion itself. And as I said earlier, belief in a higher power does not necessarily mean you must follow an ideology that someone else created. Now me personally, I believe in a "god" just as much as I believe in flying rainbow unicorns... it's impossible to prove they do not exist, but also impossible to prove they do exist. That being said, someone who decides to believe in a god (without the narrow ideology of a religion) can at least acknowledge the absurdity of religion in and of itself, they can think for themselves, they can come to their own conclusions, which is why in a roundabout way (whether I share the same beliefs of the supernatural as them or not) they are still based.

Interesting points. Your final paragraph resonates with me. I believe there is a spiritual component to this world but, like you, the idea of a Christian-like God is indeed hard to subscribe to. You should check out Buddhism sometime. Im not asking you to convert, as I am not a Buddhist either, but its very unique compared to the other major religions. Its one of the few religions that does not acknowledge the existence of a god, rather the focus is simply becoming a better, wiser, more experienced form of you through discipline/hard work and spiritual health. Its the only religion that actually promotes accountability of self rather than the notion commonly disliked here that goes something along the lines of "its okay to not understand. God has a plan for you." I dont like that notion either, as times are different and we now live in the age of information where we CAN help ourselves and almost ENTIRELY control our lives from start to finish.
|
Modern religion does/can still have benefits, despite whether or not we subscribe to modern religion. The need for a sense of community/belonging is a core trait of human nature, and relgion does an excellent job of establishing communities of people, for better or worse. Humans that do not participate in communities are typically less happy, so its more than likely religion will ALWAYS exist almost exclusively for that reason, and if someone has to tell themselves "whatever sure god is a thing, time to go make friends to invite to watch the game after sunday service" then thats exactly what they're gonna do.

 

[Spiritual survivor]

Why?
You are forced to participate in life simply by being, and human nature is a communal one. Up until modern times, it was far more realistic to expect that at some point in your life, youd be contributing in some way to the advancement of your race - whether that meant through being a settler during expansion, partaking in manifest destiny, fighting in wars that directly threatened to extinguish your way of life back home, or just in general being able to more tangibly see the detrimental/positive effects of simply your existence as it impacted your community because of how massively scaled back and less complex things were, almost exclusively due to the absence of technology yet. Even religion had a different purpose back then - it was the centerpiece/unifier of communities and existed as the unofficial moral guidelines/rulebook when it comes to creating communities that could prosper.
Things are much, much different today, and I've got really 2 main things to point out:
1.) "Born too early to explore the stars, born too late to explore the earth. Born just in time to craft your perfect AI catgirl waifu." The first sentence is a legitimate quote, the second adds modern context lol. What I'm saying here has more or less been stated in the previous paragraph - we dont have the same opportunities to contribute to the advancement of our race that our forefathers did. The world is completely figured out, everything is already owned, there really is no land left for expansion, and finally, we have evolved to my next point:
2.) Survival of the fittest has been phased out entirely at this point. At least in the states and pretty much the rest of the developed world. What i mean by that is, its kinda not even possible to fail anymore. Or, at least, you REALLY dont have to worry about never having a roof over your head or some form of food in your belly. I have seen so many people just r**e the system to get on welfare, food stamps, and get into no-income housing when in all reality they were just being lazy or clinging to a "disability" that is reallllllly just an inconvenience at the end of the day, and they are more than able to work still. You can COMPLETELY fail in the modern day and you more than likely will still be given shelter and food by the govt/charity orgs.
Many people subconsciously take these 2 points, regardless of being able to articulate them in the same manner, and just kinda.... give up. And who can blame them? It's harder than ever to succeed as a young person just starting out in life, and why would you bother to try so hard and risk so much and maybe encounter failure (a necessity to build resilience and strength btw) when you can just give up from the start and have your new uncle sam mommy keep taking care of you.
It is worth noting that i very much believe in those welfare systems for those who legitimately need it.

Now that that's been said, ill answer you more directly: because people who just give up right away are massive burdons to society. They were far more noticeable in their detrimental societal impacts when communities back in the day were much much smaller and not behind screens. You would immediately notice the non-contributor. Now, its almost impossible to notice when someone is failing to contribute because there are so damn many of us across so damn many more communities, with everyone now belonging to multiple communitieson top of that. It wasnt like that in the past (think tech/SM bringing us together). The concept of sloth was created back then to keep people's moral compasses good while they lived their lives moreso to survive than thrive, unlike us. Now, we live in an age where you really can pursue mostly whatever you want, and there's no risk of famine/death when you fail, so its doubly pathetic when people say "why is being lazy so bad?" Because dude, you live in the most free and highest-quality-of-life period in all of history so far, and you still fail to see that you can basically do anything without significant repurcussion because of it?

Regarding the smaller communities stuff: there is a verrrrrrry well investigated concept in psychology about how our abilities to communicate and govern go out the window as soon as our tribe sizes [think modern companies with many employees] exceed numbers as small as 100-150 people.


Sorry for the long reply, but between this answer and what @Spiritual survivor said, there's your true answer to that rather deep yet simple question.

Interesting points. Your final paragraph resonates with me. I believe there is a spiritual component to this world but, like you, the idea of a Christian-like God is indeed hard to subscribe to. You should check out Buddhism sometime. Im not asking you to convert, as I am not a Buddhist either, but its very unique compared to the other major religions. Its one of the few religions that does not acknowledge the existence of a god, rather the focus is simply becoming a better, wiser, more experienced form of you through discipline/hard work and spiritual health. Its the only religion that actually promotes accountability of self rather than the notion commonly disliked here that goes something along the lines of "its okay to not understand. God has a plan for you." I dont like that notion either, as times are different and we now live in the age of information where we CAN help ourselves and almost ENTIRELY control our lives from start to finish.
|
Modern religion does/can still have benefits, despite whether or not we subscribe to modern religion. The need for a sense of community/belonging is a core trait of human nature, and relgion does an excellent job of establishing communities of people, for better or worse. Humans that do not participate in communities are typically less happy, so its more than likely religion will ALWAYS exist almost exclusively for that reason, and if someone has to tell themselves "whatever sure god is a thing, time to go make friends to invite to watch the game after sunday service" then thats exactly what they're gonna do.

I will just say this. God never intended it as a punishment to be here. He intended us to live with joy, peace, fulfillment, purpose. We do have an adversary here in this world called Satan. This entity is constantly trying to destroy us and getting us to destroy ourselves, because he is jealous of God and hates us, who are God's creation.