Ray believes with Dawkins that (1) God is more complex than anything God would be invoked to explain. Moreover, (2) you can’t invoke a more complex cause to explain a less complex effect. I already argued that (2) is false. As for (1), there is an underlying issue to address. David asks: “Why should we assume that all intelligent agents are complex?” Exactly. Why?
But an even more immediate question needs to be addressed: what does “complex” mean in this context? Does it mean statistically unlikely? If so then God isn’t complex because, as I said, by definition if God exists then he exists necessarily.
Or do we mean complexity in terms of having multiple parts? If that is the claim then God isn’t complex because he is a simple substance like a soul.
Or do we mean complexity in terms of producing complex effects? Well God would qualify in that case. The problem is that the ability to produce complex effects doesn’t mean the thing which produces the effects is itself complex. An element is relatively simple and yet can produce a range of effects on its surrounding environment. Nobody suggests that in virtue of those complex effects the element is itself “complex”. That’s mere confusion.