Having arrived at the necessity of a rational, Omnipotent being using the human faculties of reason and rhetoric, I will continue in this endeavor by now beginning to identify the character of the Omnipotent. He or She must have a character by the simply by virtue of existing in the state that I have called “being-hood.” Also notice, I will call the Omnipotent a He or She from now on–also as a consequence of His or Her being-hood.
Character is a consequence of being-hood because being-hood is the very thing that ultimately causes character (and always causes it). By character, I mean the category of qualities of which humanity is the only “known” (or, more accurately, “present to the physical senses in the mortal universe”) race in possession. These qualities are things like virtue, personality, and other such qualities for which, in some cases, there are no words to describe. All exist as a result of being-hood because of their transcendence of simple reality (see blog on Fractal Reality) and their requirement of rationality.
Therefore the Omnipotent has character, but Him having character has much greater implications than one might first see on the surface: it means that all of Reality, the entire universe and beyond, has a singular character and not another. This means that the Omnipotent and Reality are either Good or Bad, Open-minded or Close-minded, Charitable or Selfish, etc. The task, then, remains to identify these “character traits.”
Let us begin by considering the nature of reality as embodied in the nature of people. Few would disagree that humanity is a race of morals. That’s not to say that they are moral beings, but that they, at the very lest, know right from wrong, and feel an obligation to act as would be acceptable in light of this knowledge (and I’m not just hacking this claim together, this is the very same thing for which Freud so famously coined the scientific term “Super Ego”). Indeed, this quality is very much responsible for the preservation and civilization of humanity all across the ages. We can therefore feel quite safe in concluding that the Omnipotent, for whatever reason, wanted humanity to feel accountable for their own morality; i.e. feel joy as a result of righteous action and guilt as a result of evil action.
This conclusion, however, says little about the Omnipotent Himself at this point; there is a piece missing in the puzzle. That piece is the unanswered question of whether the Omnipotent even knows or cares about humanity. The answer is rather simple: by definition He must. If the Omnipotent encompasses all of reality, and everything that exists, including humanity, exists relative to him, then there is nothing in the universe, including humanity, that is not a thought or idea directly out of His very mind. That is, nothing can exist unless He came up with it and designed its every detail. For humanity, this means that He not only knows about us each individually and personally, but also that He designed our every intricacy and, being a Rational Being, all for a very specific purpose or function. For it is an act of irrationality to create or, more accurately, to come up with something for no reason (as one of the defining characteristics of rational thought is that the thoughts have purpose or “reason” behind them, hence the wording).
Therefore, this Omnipotent Being designed us in a particular way for a particular reason, and gave our creation some amount of thought. In truth, the amount of thought He gave (or gives) could not but be infinite. By virtue of being an infinite Being and existing in a purely Fractal Reality (a reality in which all things have infinite concrete detail), He cannot be or do anything to any finite degree, but must rather be and do infinitely all things that He is and does. To better understand the actual logic that leads to this conclusion, please see my post on Fractal Reality, but for a rhetorical proof, just try to imagine a being that is infinitely real but is only somewhat good or only gives a small amount of consideration to what He creates. Such a being is logically paradoxical, for a being must use a percentage (not just an amount) of their total thoughts they ever conceptualize towards the creation of any one idea, and for a being with an infinite amount of thoughts, this must be an infinite amount of consideration (this forms, if you like calculus as much as I do, a fractal with an infinite area)˚. Keep in mind that the Omnipotent cannot be bound to time, and therefore, it does not make sense for Him to think about something for “just five minutes” or the like.
Thus, the Omnipotent gave an infinite amount of consideration to His design of humanity. Therefore, we can be sure that He knows us very personally and must also care that we fulfill the purpose for which he rationally created us. Because, of course, by very nature of creating something for a purpose, one must care that the thing fulfills that purpose. The question then remains: what sort of purpose might this be?
His every thought must, in its most natural state, be infinite by the same logic used in the paragraph before last. Therefore everything that exists (that is, every thought in His mind) exists infinitely–Fractal reality ultimately wins the argument. Therefore, we His creation, in our most natural state, must exist infinitely. However, our bodies may be temporal. Allow me to clarify: it is our reason, and thus our being, that He, a rational being, must be the ultimate cause of (the cause of casualty), but he does not necessarily possess the same relation to our bodies; i.e. our bodies need not be direct “thoughts out of his mind,” though they still exist relative to Him (note once more, with Fractal Reality this is all simultaneously literal and figurative depending on what you mean by those words). Therefore, only the being part of us need exist infinitely, but our bodies, while still created by Him, need not, to add more metaphor/imagery, be born of Him in order to exist but may have been created by Him merely as a means of housing His child. Another model of this phenomenon is as follows: our being is directly made out of His being or thought of in His mind, but our bodies were “made by his hands.” He still must have given infinite consideration to the creation of our finite bodies, but only for the purpose of housing us who are formed of (not only by) his infinite being and therefore exist infinitely†.
And so He created us to be infinite beings with a purpose which requires a sense of morality in order to be fulfilled. The horrid thought now often comes to mind: what if this purpose is something utterly dreadful? How can we know that the Omnipotent is not just using us as he is using our bodies? This question goes back to the distinction I just made. Our beings are the flesh of His flesh. He cannot use us anymore than one can use himself. It is just odd wording to say that someone is using themselves˚. Rather, His purpose for us, who are formed of Him, must be the very same purpose He has for Himself. This cannot be a destructive purpose because the Omnipotent has a creative character, not suicidal. In addition, it is an Absolute impossibility for Him to be suicidal, for He could never destroy a single part of Himself–He is Absolutely existent, i.e. does not exist relative to a body that can be killed or anything that can end; he is beyond time. Thus, He has for us, a creative purpose that is designed, by definition, under the maxim of the Categorical Imperative because we are literally extensions of Himself.
It is a logical necessity that He is an ethical being because, like our logic, our ethics are a part of our being-hood which is a part of Him. However, if you don’t believe by logic that our ethics are faculties of our being (i.e. intrinsically linked to our reason and the rest), then, by rhetoric, consider his acting under the Categorical Imperative: He bore in us an ethical system largely based around the Categorical Imperative, and is, by very definition of who He is, acting under that same maxim. Therefore, He is infinitely good, and Him being infinitely good and infinitely caring about us and desiring of our well-being, all as has been established, makes him infinitely loving of us.
While all this logic and rhetoric seems to work out, it is likely to leave us confused. How is it possible then that we, the extensions of Himself are partly evil? The answer comes down to the definition of evil. If the Omnipotent is infinitely good, then goodness is a necessary qualifier of being a part of Him. That is, evil is the absence of Him, and, Him being the definition of existence and reality, the absence of being. The evil that exists in us in our current hybrid state (part infinite being, part finite creature) is not a part of our being; it is rather, our non-being. That a mortal, finite body could be void or partly void of being is perfectly reasonable, why this would be allowed by the Omnipotent is topic for another post.
˚the fractal has infinite area because each of its infinite sides are infinitely long (rather than approaching a limit). It is much like the limit of an iteration sequence of an already infinitely iterated fractal in a different dimension. That is, each of the Omnipotent’s thoughts can be thought of as the sides of a fractal because He has infinite thoughts, but each of those thoughts are also infinite in magnitude (they are a part of Him, and are therefore infinite). Thus the end result is a fractal with sides of infinite length each, and therefore infinite area (the area being proportional to infinity cubed in this case). This footnote is just here to confuse you and delight me; please ignore it at your convenience.
†Oh dear. So the Omnipotent can think something in His mind, and that thing can be a being (an infinite string of binary). But He can also chose to have that thing come out of His mind in to some sort of new-found “independent” existence (independent more in will than in dependency). While the concept of the means by which He has that thing come out of His mind is still an infinite (its one of His ideas), the process itself need not be. That is, in a sense, the process isn’t real because it isn’t a part of Him. Analogously, I might have a thought in my mind of something infinite and beautiful (unlike in the case of the Omnipotent, such a thought of mine would be beyond my own comprehension); I might then choose to, with my hands, embody it in some sort of finite language such as music or poetry. In the same way that the physical music or poetry is not a part of me while the thought still is, so are our bodies not necessarily a part of the Omnipotent while our beings are. Ultimately, what this means is that it is not necessary for any faculty that does not constitute for the original argument of the “necessity of the omnipotent” to exist infinitely.
˚e. g. “I am using myself to think” or “I am using myself to feel”