[Matt R.]

[ QUOTE ]
So, how does this make God unlikely to exist? Well, it’s a simple probability comparison. One of two things existed without a cause: a non-complex mass, or a being that has the power to create, control, and know the entire universe. That being, by definition, would have to be almost infinitely more complex than the simple mass, and therefore, almost infinitely less likely.


[/ QUOTE ]

This argument is silly.

How are we defining complexity? Number of moving parts? Number of amino acids comprising its genetic code? Number of fundamental particles comprising the entity?

I don't think you will see too many theists trying to claim God has N amino acids or X protons with Y electrons that comprise his body. How on earth can the term "complexity" be even used to define God?

To see what I am getting at, what would you say is more complex: A computer or a neural cell. Do you see how the classification of "complex" is completely arbitrary? You can subjectively say one is more complex than the other, or you can define some criteria making something more or less complex. But it doesn't make any sense to do it for something that we cannot even measure. How "complex" is a graviton?

In short,

[ QUOTE ]
That being, by definition, would have to be almost infinitely more complex than the simple mass, and therefore, almost infinitely less likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it is not "by definition" that a being/entity which created our physical reality must be "more complex" than that reality. Using the term complexity doesn't make any sense. Also, notice how he uses the terms "simple mass" to describe our universe. Nice choice of wording to get your point across, but I hardly think a universe which the most brilliant minds in history have hardly even come close to comprehending can be (honestly) called a "simple mass".

Just to note, I concede that there may be some deeper point to using the term "complexity" to describe a God. I just don't see it given the context and maybe he explains it further in his book. However, I have asked this question a few others times and it has been ignored by people claiming this is a great argument (hence my attitude that the argument is worthless). Maybe you can explain how he is using the word "complexity" a bit better?

As I aide note, I commend you for following what you truly believe in spite of what others around you are pushing you to do. I may disagree with your position and your reasoning, but that's what makes things interesting. So yes, I'm a theist, but I'm not trying to make any attempt to "convert" you back, just trying to understand this argument.