Thread: Gods Cannot Have Consciousness

It's not hard.

Your argument is that it is impossible for any possible omnipotent, omniscient creator to have consciousness.

If I can give an example of a single possible omnipotent, omniscient, conscious creator, hypothetical or not, as I have, then your argument is wrong.

Either accept that this is the case or redefine your terms.

I agree with your definition of God as an omnipotent and omnipresent being, and I also agree that consciousness cannot exist without time, but you do not explain how timelessness follows from your two God criteria.

I should also ask you to tell us what you mean by 'kinetic energy' or 'static energy', considering the first is apparently being used to mean something completely different from how it is actually defined, and the second doesn't even exist.

Originally Posted by Xei

It's not hard.

Your argument is that it is impossible for any omnipotent, omniscient creator to have consciousness.

If I can give an example of a single possible omnipotent, omniscient, conscious creator, hypothetical or not, as I have, then your argument is wrong.

Either accept that this is the case or redefine your terms.

Your example does not succeed.

Even in a simulated example, the creator of the simulation is not "everywhere".

For example:
- The Matrix. The creators are still not omni-beings in their actuality. The Matrix is irrelevant as we are directly speaking of the creators themselves who are, in fact, not omni-beings.

- Take an example of a simulation in which there is just 1 creator with a machine controlling other variables like androids or something (it does not really matter). The fact remains that, in that creators reality, they are still not omni-beings.

So, your argument still fails because the examples you cite or simulated realities are not counter-examples to omni-beings that would be at the beginning of everything. This being omni-beings.

~

Perhaps if you had properly defined God as the creator of reality rather than the universe.

In the latter case my argument applies.

I edited my previous post with some more questions.

Originally Posted by Xei

I agree with your definition of God as an omnipotent and omnipresent being, and I also agree that consciousness cannot exist without time, but you do not explain how timelessness follows from your two God criteria.

What? I don't understand the question.

I should also ask you to tell us what you mean by 'kinetic energy' or 'static energy', considering the first is apparently being used to mean something completely different from how it is actually defined, and the second doesn't even exist.

Although this is not pertinent to my argument (static energy, that is) I will divulge.

Kinetic energy is what we all know it to be. However, I am saying that kinetic energy is the reason for our existence. Kinetic energy is the world that we know. Without kinesis, our existence is null. So, everything we are, everything we know of, is made up of kinetic energy.

This part can be proven as we know that kinetic energy is utilized in nearly everything in our environment. I do not think I need to divulge further in this.

Static energy is, respectively, the problematic part. However, I am trying to reference it in a very vague way that works for everyone. The reason being is because it is not really important. Let me explain:

Whoever you are, whatever the belief system is, there is a "beginnig" to everything, a moment before existence. In this moment, it had to be timeless, it had to be vacant of kinetic energy. If it was not vacant of kinesis, then it is not the beginning of everything. Thus, whatever it is, it is static.

I simply call it static energy because I'm not sure what to call it. I am avoiding "God" because I want to make sure this is seen as neutral and open to interpretation.

I hope you can see how it is not exactly pertinent and that I explained it well..

~