The Christian God is NOT simple.

[Trog31]

You confuse qualitative judgement with quantitative attribute. The underlying quantitative attribute of the thing remains exactly what it is no matter what qualitative judgement your fickle mind pass on it. 3 grames is heavier than 2 grames regardless of whether you think 3 grames is heavy or light. If god is infinitely complex in the information sense than it must require more data to describe than anything with a finite information content, regardless of where you place the line between your notion of simplicity and complicity.

I don't think I confused it. It think that was the satement I was making. Mass is mass, but "heavy" and "light" are subjective.
If god is infinitely complex, there can be no description because the description would be as infinite.
Your example of god is the same as my example of a cellular entitiy. If a cell is of complexity X then a cluster of cells are more complex than the single

So? a 10 sided object still has 1 more side than a 9 sided object. If you imagine a object with infinite number of sides then it would still have more sides than any object with finite sides. Doesn't matter whether you call that "sidedness" or "complexity" or "divine polygonity".

Again that is my example and I think you're making my point for me. The underlying attributes of an entity don't change
but the arbitrary and relativistic terms we use to describe that entity change all the time. (WAAAY back to my example of an engine)
If you define complexity as "sidedness" then an object with more sides is more complex
If you define complexity as "size" then a larger object is more complex than a smaller one (regardless of how many sides or any other qualities it has)
The point is that the definitions have to be agreed upon.

Incorrect. A simple entity can only create a complex organism by taking complexity from somewhere else and adding it to what would become the complex organism. It can not manufacture complexity out of thin air.

I disagree. How can you say something takes complexity when you haven't defined complexity?
What is the "complex thing" that a single cell takes in order to replicate?
It takes a number things much simpler than itself (heat, carbon, amino acids, etc.) and combines them to become an entity just as
complex (or in some cases MORE complex) than itself.
It can manufacture "complexity" out of other simpler building blocks, but again it depends on how you define "complex"
Is a house more complex than a tree? Again it depends on how you define complex.
Certainly a house has more components and serves a different function, but it cannot grow and replicate like a tree even
though trees are a part of it.

So to fully describe the simple entity, one must also descibe the complexity it would use to create the complex organism. Thus an appearently simple entity would be seen as simpler than its product no longer if one were to descibe all involved in the process of making its product. Modern physics say information can never be created or destroyed. There are only complexity about a single entity that created an appearently more complex organism that you neglected to describe. There are no complexity that the simple entity actually create.

I'm not sure I agree with you because you haven't defined the terms simple and complex.
Fully describing an entity in no way requires a description of how it was created.
I can fully describe a square (four sided polygon, with 4 90-degree angles, and each side is 1 unit in length)
I don't need to describe how it came to be.

I don't think modern physics says information cannot be created or destroyed, I think it says ENERGY cannot be
created or destroyed in a closed system. Information is destroyed and created constantly.

I disagree entirely with your last statement. Music, art, literature, language, customs, etc, etc. All started as "simpler"
units that were brought together to create something "more complex" (again in relativistic terms)
Letters were combined to form words, which were combined to form sentences, paragraphs, chapters, books and libraries
How "complex" or "simple" those entities are depend completely on perception and interpretation
Going back to the original point.

One cannot say God is "complex" when the term "complex" can't be defined
If, as you say, it takes a "more complex" entity to create a "complex" entity
then an infinitely complex entity could never exist.
If you say that a star is more complex than super heated plasma or dust or any of the things
it takes to produce one, how could stars (or any matter) ever form?