God is simple, not complex.

[Gambit]

Atheists seem to have this basic misunderstanding that God is complex. This is not true. God is simple, not complex. In theology, this is known as the doctrine of "divine simplicity." (This is why I can argue that God is the most parsimonious explanation for why there is something rather than nothing.)

In theology, the doctrine of divine simplicity says that God is without parts. The general idea of divine simplicity can be stated in this way: the being of God is identical to the "attributes" of God. In other words, such characteristics as omnipresence, goodness, truth, eternity, etc. are identical to God's being, not qualities that make up that being, nor abstract entities inhering in God as in a substance.

(source: Wikipedia: Divine simplicity)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Atheists seem to have this basic misunderstanding that God is complex. This is not true. God is simple, not complex. In theology, this is known as the doctrine of "divine simplicity." (This is why I can argue that God is the most parsimonious explanation for why there is something rather than nothing.)

And a catalyst lacking intentionality is simpler. Your parsimony argument is semantic silliness.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I rarely use Wikipedia, if any. That definition is saying the attributes "omnipresence, goodness, truth, eternity," are all personified into a person who tells at once orally and now inwardly laws he/she must obey, morals that need to be kept, etc?

Divine Simplicity | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Divine simplicity is central to the classical Western concept of God. Simplicity denies any physical or metaphysical composition in the divine being. This means God is the divine nature itself and has no accidents (properties that are not necessary) accruing to his nature. There are no real divisions or distinctions in this nature. Thus, the entirety of God is whatever is attributed to him. Divine simplicity is the hallmark of God’s utter transcendence of all else, ensuring the divine nature to be beyond the reach of ordinary categories and distinctions, or at least their ordinary application. Simplicity in this way confers a unique ontological status that many philosophers find highly peculiar.

In this case, maybe God is too simplistic. I mean, I believe God is life itself. There is nothing metaphysical about our existence nor is there about a baby being born and having air to breathe. However, the underline thing behind it is mystical, I'm sure...but easy to understand when we stop trying to personify our life to relate to it better. (Unless you're doing it in a healthy way rather than having bloody history as a result of it)

Atheists seem to have this basic misunderstanding that God is complex. This is not true. God is simple, not complex. In theology, this is known as the doctrine of "divine simplicity." (This is why I can argue that God is the most parsimonious explanation for why there is something rather than nothing.)

Oh, here's another: Divine Simplicity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[George-ananda]

So you are saying God/Brahman is pure sat-chit-ananda (being-awareness-bliss) and not that He is a being that has these attributes. I like this a lot, Gambit. Mind-challenging. Explains why many eastern masters say 'God is pure being-awareness-bliss' rather than 'God has the attributes of being, awareness and bliss. Things are making more sense. Thanks.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Atheist understand god as nothing. Whether god is simple or complex is irrelevant. Neither has anything to with existent. What a god can even be is nonsensical to many atheists since they ALL make no sense. That is why atheist are atheist since NO GOD is existent.

Most atheist though if speaking about a god will only reference the one being used which is often times monotheistic

 

[NulliuSINverba]

God is simple, not complex.

Unsubstantiated assertion.

In theology, this is known as the doctrine of "divine simplicity." (This is why I can argue that God is the most parsimonious explanation for why there is something rather than nothing.)

Which one strikes you are more parsimonious?

A.) The Universe happened.
B.) The Universe happened because of God.

Actually, never mind which one is more parsimonious. Please explain why adding a hypothetical deity to the equation is "the most parsimonious" explanation. Thanks.

 

[Trolle]

I like to think that "God" is unknowable and all efforts to explain this entity are simply opinions.

 

[Tiapan]

Contradictory I think

If a God is the one that created the universe then by definition "He" was in scientific terms, obviously, the "Big Bang", as the universe is recognized as originating from this structure. ("His" voice still radiates at 4 degrees Kelvin!).

God was therefore extremely simple, just a pile of seething very hot quarks, that were randomly moving too fast to stick together long enough to form any sort of complex structure. As far as information holding capacity is concerned, this protouniverse was a miniscule 1-bit, (my laptop is 64-bit!)

However as the big bang expanded and cooled becoming our universe, structure and complexity developed as quarks began coalescing to form electrons, protons, neutrons, atoms, molecules, photons, gas, liquids, solids, and plasma etc. until eventually it led to us humans on that speck of dust called planet earth. All this of course, occurred over a very long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long time, in fact about 13,700,000,000 years

Perhaps as the universe cools further and becomes more complex we may eventually create a universe wide communications network, a structure and interaction that may approach something similar to that of the various anthropomorphised human religious concepts of the all knowing, all seeing God/s. A being of such extreme complexity and power may one day evolve in some chilly distant future universe, but I have not seen one yet so I guess I will just have wait.

Is god just a super-computer of some distant chilly future, or some dumb goofball pile of hot quarks in the distant fiery past?

Cheers

 

[Ouroboros]

Atheists seem to have this basic misunderstanding that God is complex. This is not true. God is simple, not complex. In theology, this is known as the doctrine of "divine simplicity." (This is why I can argue that God is the most parsimonious explanation for why there is something rather than nothing.)

That's a good point. However, I don't see how purpose or intent is something simple. For a supreme supernatural being to having a purpose or intent for this universe, it would require thoughts, wouldn't it?

Here's the thing. If God is simple and not complex, then the ultimate nature of God would have to be the absolute simplest, which is nothing. Nothing is the first simplicity of all things. Set theory starts with the empty set. The origin of an axis is zero. And so on. Do you agree with this or can you explain it further if you're not?

The cool thing with a simple God is that it fits with science though. It starts at the quantum level (or lower), and physics is built from that. Life started at simple metabolic systems without cells, and later more complex structures came about. It all fits with pantheism actually. The simple beginning, leading to this complex world.

 

[AllanV]

I like to think that "God" is unknowable and all efforts to explain this entity are simply opinions.

Opinions begin from stubbornness and are regarded as stumbling blocks or idols.

Therefore a person is then stubbornly idolizing their owns minds power of reasoning as superior.

 

[Ouroboros]

I rarely use Wikipedia, if any. That definition is saying the attributes "omnipresence, goodness, truth, eternity," are all personified into a person who tells at once orally and now inwardly laws he/she must obey, morals that need to be kept, etc?

Divine nature, as it says in the quote, could perhaps be also written Nature Divine.

Divine Simplicity | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

In this case, maybe God is too simplistic. I mean, I believe God is life itself. There is nothing metaphysical about our existence nor is there about a baby being born and having air to breathe. However, the underline thing behind it is mystical, I'm sure...but easy to understand when we stop trying to personify our life to relate to it better. (Unless you're doing it in a healthy way rather than having bloody history as a result of it)

Amen. I think we're on the same wavelength. God is life, and Life is God. Existence, reality, nature, all of it, all of us too, mind and matter, ties together as one unity, which we can call God. Nothing is simpler than that.

 

[Trolle]

Opinions begin from stubbornness and are regarded as stumbling blocks or idols.

Therefore a person is then stubbornly idolizing their owns minds power of reasoning as superior.

I've heard that this is the meaning of the Commandment "Thou shall have no other Gods before me".

 

[AllanV]

Some do not like this analogy but it is something similar to a bottle of whiskey.
There is the alcohol and then the constituents and blend that gives the flavor.

God is an energizing life giving Spirit and the word or spokesman is the pattern or flavor.

The word was incarnate in Jesus.

 

[Ouroboros]

I've heard that this is the meaning of the Commandment "Thou shall have no other Gods before me".

That's quite an interesting interpretation. People's own ideas of God are the idols. Perhaps we can say that religious fundamentalism and literalism are the worst offenders, creating an idol of their own religion.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I've heard that this is the meaning of the Commandment "Thou shall have no other Gods before me".

… from a relabel source, no doubt.

 

[Ouroboros]

Some do not like this analogy but it is something similar to a bottle of whiskey.
There is the alcohol and then the constituents and blend that gives the flavor.

Sounds good to me!

God is an energizing life giving Spirit and the word or spokesman is the pattern or flavor.

Sure.

The word was incarnate in Jesus.

Which is an opinion and not a fact about God. Someone smart said, "Opinions begin from stubbornness and are regarded as stumbling blocks or idols. Therefore a person is then stubbornly idolizing their owns minds power of reasoning as superior." And I think he was right about that. Wait, it was you, wasn't it?

 

[AllanV]

I've heard that this is the meaning of the Commandment "Thou shall have no other Gods before me".

We have to be careful, don't I.

 

[AllanV]

Sounds good to me!


Sure.


Which is an opinion and not a fact about God. Someone smart said, "Opinions begin from stubbornness and are regarded as stumbling blocks or idols. Therefore a person is then stubbornly idolizing their owns minds power of reasoning as superior." And I think he was right about that. Wait, it was you, wasn't it?

It is actually in the scriptures of the Bible.

My mind was opened up to God and the pattern was revealed in how a planet moves with a spiral prescribed within concentric circles.
I was completely energized, my whole body and the pattern was understood along with a comparison of my mind with the mind of an immortal.

 

[Trolle]

That's quite an interesting interpretation. People's own ideas of God are the idols. Perhaps we can say that religious fundamentalism and literalism are the worst offenders, creating an idol of their own religion.

I thought it to be quite interesting as well, but it kinda makes sense. I don't think there is anything wrong with having opinions but to hold an idea of God as a fact when we truly don't know is quite arrogant in my opinion.

 

[Ouroboros]

It is actually in the scriptures of the Bible.

Which is a set of books written by people with opinions about God. Just because someone wrote down what they thought a long time ago doesn't make them right. I think many Christians make an idol of their Bible and their religion and can't see beyond the words.

My mind was opened up to God and the pattern was revealed in how a planet moves with a spiral prescribed within concentric circles.
I was completely energized, my whole body and the pattern was understood along with a comparison of my mind with the mind of an immortal.

Sure.

Years ago I had an experience (as an atheist) of a complete and full unity with the universe. I felt that everything is One, and I was part of it. That day I started to understand pantheism.