Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Theological-philosophical analysis demonstrates the limits of creator ownership in artificial intelligence, indicating participatory formation entails duties of care rather than absolute possession.
This open theological-philosophical working paper examines formation, ownership, authority, and moral responsibility across Mesopotamian creation narratives, Christian theology, artificial intelligence, and speculative contact scenarios. It distinguishes textual evidence, theological interpretation, philosophical argument, and disciplined speculation so that analogy is never treated as proof. Its central principle is that participation in forming a being does not establish absolute ownership over that being. Applied conditionally to artificial intelligence, the paper argues that if genuine artificial subjectivity ever emerges, humanity’s role in its formation would create responsibilities of care rather than unrestricted possession. The paper locates ultimate creative authority in God, disclosed through the Word and exercised in Christ, while presenting its claims as an open thesis rather than technological prediction, prophetic timetable, or assertion of present artificial consciousness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bruce R. Beck (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: