OBJ-007: “Divine simplicity vs operator decomposition”

Target claim(s)

Any portrayal of God as “three operators” that reads like God is made of parts or internal modules.

The objection (steelman)

“Classical theism says God is simple (not composed). Your operator breakdown makes God look like a composite machine. That’s theological incoherence.”

Why it seems compelling

Many formal models accidentally reify distinctions as “parts”.

Reply (logic-first)

• The operators are role types in the model, not physical parts in God.
• “Simplicity” can be preserved if:
  • the operators are not independent pieces that can vary separately, and
  • the model treats them as one unified source described under different functional aspects.
• If the framework wants to claim doctrinal alignment, it must explicitly declare the intended reading: “distinction without composition” (role distinction, not part distinction).

What would change my mind

• If the framework starts treating the operators as separable modules with independent state, the simplicity objection stands and the model must be revised.