[I’m mindful of the language gap but] Your logic is flawed here.
Let’s start at the end. You wrote:
“Truth is that mother earth lends a body to "god" so he can experience the beauty she created. The beauty of body emotion and the beauty of the environment”.
That is basically one of the ways modern Hindus view things although they would substitute Universe for Earth. The Universe is Brahman/Atman exploring or experiencing its infinity. One problem I have with this is that all the discoveries or experiences must perforce come from Brahman/Atman in the first place, so what is to be discovered or experienced that is not already known. In Hermetic terms ‘all is in THE ALL; THE ALL is in all’. Another problem is that Brahman/Atman is supposed to be Perfect so how can it gain from such exploring or experiencing. You actually conceded this point when you wrote: “The fragment cant learn anything, its a fragment of the omnipotent force and therefore complete”. Where you are in error is that the fragment is not complete per se; it is a fragment but it contains, in potential, the complete. Obvious analogy is a fragment of a hologram.
If we take a cell, a human and a planet as examples, these are all forms of the same consciousness - the same in essence but different in degree (consciousness wearing a certain form). Neither the cell body, the human body or the planetary body does the choosing, that is done by the consciousness. When, for example, a human body dies (the consciousness currently being human leaves) the cells go on living for a certain time until the conditions necessary for their living no longer exist, i.e. the consciousness being a cell leaves and the physical matter of the cell breaks down into its constituent atoms (which are also forms of consciousness).
“The mental conditioning to think you/we are different”. We are different. Everything is different. All the, e.g. skin cells in my body are different; my skin cells are different from your skin cells. Nothing in this Universe is exactly the same as anything else. I’m talking about degree here not essence.
This is the old philosophical problem of ‘the one and the many’. Personally it’s not a problem for me, it’s just one theme and countless variations on it.
Contrary to modern or popular opinion, we are, each ‘thing’, here to be selfish, that is to be our self. From a human perspective, it does not necessarily follow from this that it has to be dog-eat-dog or every man for himself. We (being) humans have choice, minerals, plants and animals do not.
This brings us to the question of good and evil. Sri Aurobindo describes ‘evil’ as: ‘evil, duritad
, literally, the wrong going, the stumbling to which we are subjected’. If I’m not mistaken the word ‘sin’ comes from a Greek word which means to miss the point. There is no crime and punishment involved. The story of Adam and Eve in Genesis shows this also. The fruit came from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. What was introduced into the world was not evil per se but choice. The Consciousness (or the Universe) itself does not have choice as such as it ‘instinctively’ ‘knows’ the correct decision at any given moment. We humans cannot make a ‘wrong’ choice as any and all choices available to us, individually or collectively, are dictated by the Universe. The Universe itself is dictated to by the Fiat Lux, the Logos, Ananke (necessity), or the Vedic term which I can’t remember (the Breath of Brahma).
We humans don’t have to go with the flow. Because we have choice we can choose to do something about our condition, individually and, at least in theory, collectively. This is the spiritual growth to which Steven referred. The term is actually a misnomer as spirit cannot grow; spirit just is. What can be grown is one’s awareness of it. But one has to chose to become aware of it.
The Devil in the Bible never actually kills anyone, certainly nowhere near as many as the ‘kind and loving god’. All the Devil does is to offer people choices. People hate making choices, they prefer the comfort-zone.