What if Judas didn't do it?

[Objectivist]

This, right here, is the explicit invocation of the primacy of consciousness fundamental to judeo christian monotheism and the stolen concept all rolled into one.  

Under the primacy of consciousness....there is no existence itself, called reality per se - there is only whatever happens to be floating around in a megamind.  For example, reality doesn't dictate whether things fall or float.  The megamind dictates this, and it could be whatever said megamind dictates.  The term reality is meaningless in this formulation, but so compelling that people who would assert as much feel the need to try a quick smash and grab, despite the fact that the very existence of any reality per se is a rejection of the primacy of consciousness, and powerfully argues -for- objectivism.

This, amusingly, does not apply to all or even most gods.  Yet another self inflicted wound from the god of the philosophers™.  It's a ridiculously easy objection for theism to overcome, but christianity is wedded to stepping on that rake for no reason other than it's own insistence.  I say this because the assertion gets them nowhere, supports nothing, and is completely uneccesary to any other thing in the christian orbit of belief.

What are you going on about? Certainly nothing related to what Bel or I actually said. There is no primacy of consciousness or primacy of existence. It is a false dicotomy. There only the primacy of God.

I've heard this objection plenty of times.  The primacy of God means the primacy of consciousness since God is supposed to be the consciousness on which all things depend. You are just playing semantics games.  It is not a false dichotomy since what is at issue is the relationship between a subject and its object.  The object and subject are distinct from each other and their relationship is contextually fixed.  There can be no consciousness without existence.  What are you conscious of?  I'm not conscious of anything, I'm just conscious.   Therefore consciousness is dependent on existence and not the other way around.  

Give up.  It's not possible to escape this issue.  No matter what you say in answer to it, you affirm the primacy of consciousness unless you also claim that your answer is true because you want it to be.  Is your "primacy of God" true because you want it to be or is it true independent of anyone's thoughts or beliefs to the contrary?  

As soon as you say "it is" the primacy of existence is implicit.  Otherwise, all one would have to do is answer that it "might be true for you but it isn't for me" and what argument could be made to overcome this answer.  

To say that "God is" is to say that existence exists independent of consciousness and there also exists a consciousness on which existence depends.