How complex is God?

Or the Old Testament writers mistakenly envisioned God as a person.This is the much more likely prospect. The innate proclivity of humans to anthropomorphize God is very well established. Most early Gods where mighty men elevated to Godhood. The Biblical deity was not any different than most of these early Gods. Just a side note: Science has not established the principle of irreducible complexity. How can you make such claims with a straight face.Irreducible complexity is a fanciful term that is just another form of the God of the Gaps arguement. Most of what has been offered up as irreducibly complex has been found to be attainable in small steps from existing components that have been co-opted for other uses.However that is not the topic of this thread.The question is what made this complex God complex? As stated one of the underlying principles of ID is that complexity is always caused by an underlying intelligent agent. If God is complex what intelligence created this Godly complexity?

I am not really playing a game. The best explanation for the depiction of God as a person in the OT is the prevailing and frequently demonstrated tendency of humans to anthropomorphize the divine. Xenophanes realized this as early as 5th century BC and ridiculed the anthropomorphic gods of Greece.The God of the OT is similar and is really just an elevated warlord - exactly what you would expect of a tribe of the place and period enmeshed in constant warfare.Further the most likely explanation of multiple names and characteristics of God in the bible is best explained by different writers of different cultures and not some complex and contradictory revelation of God.You turn-about quote doesn't even work. Darwin collected facts and then synthesis the concept of Natural Selection based on reasoning. He did not set out to find facts that bolster a preconceived theory. Nope just reasoning based on evidence. You avoid the point and respond with some tangential assumed rubbish.Your original claim was that "Modern science has voluminously established that irreducible complexity is a fact" That is *not* fact - authoritative sounding statements like that may playout in a Sunday school class but not here.And you ignored the whole point of this thread.... Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Perhaps one of the most absurd and feeble attempts at a defense I have seen in quite some time. The Koran denies the divinity of Jesus. Do you have an "explanation" for this? Why would we not immediately believe the textual evidence? It claims to be Godly inspired. Why should we not immediately fall face down and acknowledge its textual validity?Thanks for the presumption Ray, but I am not a Atheist.Do you believe the Bible should be placed above any analysis and questioning? What a hoot. Ray you are the one with the ulterior motive. You are making an emotional quixotic stand against all reason, data, logic, good judgment and common sense. Your last refuge when cornered is to hurl the ole "Atheists and Darwinists" label, which you believe fixes all leaks in your reasoning and logic. Dude, reality is calling. You have *not* shown any evidence!

The validity is always the issue.The text does not say that God reveals himself as a person. The text talks about God as a person (specifically a male warlord that even enjoys wine and grows angry and changes his mind). You are assuming that God reveals himself as a person.I will stress again that envisioning God as human was *very* common at that period and in the surrounding region. This is not a "counterfactual supposition" but supported by evidence. What is a supposition is that the creator of the universe great and small would carry on like a human. But you do. You got your undies in a knot because I would suggest that the most likely reason that the OT represents God as a human is because that was the norm for the time and period and not immediately believe the "textual evidence". "Your kind".... "atheist philosophy"... "remember that Iceage is an Atheist"It is sort of a EVC goodwin's law that when your defenses disintegrates to the hurling of labels - you lose. As soon as you do, we know you have hit the bottom and you nothing else to offer. Where? Please demonstrate where? Where have you presented any evidence that it is logic or common sense to assume that God reveals himself as a person or that the use of several different names points to the complexity of God?The only thing you mentioned is "textual evidence". Not believing in that the bible is factual or the word of God does not equate to atheism. Keep that mind.I am not corrupting anything!