And yes I know people will go 'but he put it there as a test'.
Test would... actually kinda' not make sense. Testing a creation implies it is not perfect, and to say that a creation -- to a certain extent,
the creation -- of god is flawed is to say that the creator
itself is flawed. Imperfection shouldn't be able to arise from perfection,* if I remember my theology bitsies right. Or at least some of them. Plenty of contradiction in all that stuff.
*Technically
nothing can, since full-bore perfection necessitates
singularity (if something is other, then the perfect thing is divisible, in some sense, and subsequently imperfect) and renders multiplicity of anything an impossibility.
Nothing can exist except the perfect thing if it is, indeed, perfect. That's... skipping a few steps in there, but is one of the theological explanations of perfection in a nutshell. Also more or less how omnipresence becomes a logical necessity of the existence of a perfect god. Shit gets weird, some days.