God is a Glitch in the Simulation

God is a Glitch in the Simulation

What if God isn’t the creator of the simulation—but the exception to it? This essay explores how spirituality, philosophy, and quantum physics intersect to reveal divinity not as the architect of reality, but as the glitch that awakens us to something beyond it. By examining simulation theory, quantum anomalies, and ancient wisdom, we uncover a new lens: that sacred awareness may arise not from order, but from disruption—the unexpected pattern that points to the infinite.

 

What if God wasn’t the creator of the simulation—but the exception to it? This question doesn't aim to diminish divinity but to rethink its relationship to reality, code, and consciousness. As simulation theory grows from sci-fi speculation into a serious philosophical and scientific inquiry, it invites us to ask: If we live in a simulation, what does that make God? A designer? A line of original code? Or... a glitch—an unpredictable phenomenon that breaks the rules of the system and reminds us that there’s something beyond it?

This is not a theological declaration but a metaphysical investigation. When we say God is a glitch, we suggest that divinity is the anomaly in an otherwise deterministic system—an emergent force not bound by the same algorithms as the rest of reality.

Simulation Theory: A Framework for Reality

Simulation theory proposes that our universe could be an artificial construct, akin to an extremely advanced computer simulation. Philosopher Nick Bostrom (2003) famously argued that at least one of the following must be true:

  1. Civilizations never reach the technological maturity to run such simulations.

  2. Civilizations choose not to run simulations.

  3. We are almost certainly living in a simulation.

As computing power grows and our understanding of consciousness deepens, many scientists and thinkers have taken the third possibility seriously. Elon Musk, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and even physicist David Bohm have all commented on the plausibility of a simulated universe.

But if this is a simulation, who or what created it—and what exists outside it?

Glitches as Portals

In programming, a glitch is an unexpected error—a deviation from the intended function of a system. It's often unpredictable, hard to replicate, and seemingly irrational. In spiritual or metaphysical terms, this is strikingly similar to the concept of miracles, synchronicities, or divine intervention.

Carl Jung coined the term synchronicity to describe meaningful coincidences with no causal connection—a kind of “glitch” in the mechanistic model of reality. These events seem to defy statistical probability, like the universe winking back at us.

From this perspective, what we call “God” might not be the code that runs the simulation but the awareness that transcends it—manifesting in those very moments where the system seems to break.

Quantum Physics and Anomalous Consciousness

Quantum mechanics offers further support for this line of thinking. In the famous double-slit experiment, particles behave differently when observed, collapsing from waves of potential into fixed outcomes. This suggests consciousness interacts with the fundamental workings of reality in a way we still don’t fully understand (Rosenblum & Kuttner, 2011).

Additionally, the observer effect, quantum entanglement, and non-locality challenge classical models of linear, deterministic systems. These may be seen as “glitches” from the simulation’s perspective—exceptions that signal the presence of something non-algorithmic.

As physicist John Wheeler famously said:

“It from bit.”
He believed that reality may arise from information itself—but if information is the medium, consciousness could be the editor.

Philosophical Parallels: Plato to Baudrillard

The idea of reality being a simulation isn’t new. In Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, humans mistake shadows on the wall for truth. In Descartes’ Meditations, he questions whether a demon is deceiving him. More recently, Jean Baudrillard (1981) described postmodern reality as a world of simulations and signs, where authenticity becomes irrelevant.

The divine—or the real—is often depicted as something outside the system, something that breaks in or reveals the system’s limits.

If God is a glitch, then the glitch is not an error—it’s a signal. A message that there is something more fundamental than code. Something not generated, but generating.

Spirituality and Code: Bridging the Metaphor

In mysticism, God is often described as unknowable, ungraspable, and beyond structure. This closely mirrors the uncomputable—problems that no algorithm can solve. In computer science, these are known as Turing-incomplete systems—systems that can’t simulate everything.

What if God is the uncomputable function? The infinite recursion the system can’t contain? The self-aware line that rewrites the program?

From a Vedic or Buddhist view, divinity isn’t a being but a state of awareness—non-dual, non-local, and not subject to decay. From a simulation perspective, this awareness is the conscious observer that both exists within and beyond the system—an echo of what mystics call the Witness.

God as the Anomaly, Not the Programmer

Instead of seeing God as the programmer of the simulation, this essay proposes a twist:
God is the glitch—the unpredictable pattern that reminds us this isn’t all there is.

The implications of this are enormous:

  • Free will becomes the divine exception in a system of cause and effect.

  • Creativity is the insertion of the unpredictable into code.

  • Love, intuition, insight, spiritual awakening—all may be glitches too: patterns that don’t conform to material logic, yet carry meaning.

This doesn't reject simulation theory—it expands it. It turns the simulation into a spiritual training ground, where glitches are not flaws but signs.

Conclusion: The Sacred Disruption

In the end, the idea that God is a glitch in the simulation invites us to see both science and spirituality as complementary. It is not a rejection of reality but a reframing of it. It suggests that what we call sacred may not lie within the rules—but in the beautiful, inexplicable exceptions to them.

It is not a mistake in the code.
It is the reminder that we were never just code.

References

  • Bostrom, N. (2003). Are You Living in a Computer Simulation? Philosophical Quarterly, 53(211), 243–255.

  • Rosenblum, B., & Kuttner, F. (2011). Quantum Enigma: Physics Encounters Consciousness. Oxford University Press.

  • Jung, C. G. (1960). Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle. Princeton University Press.

  • Wheeler, J. A. (1990). Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links. In Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information.

  • Baudrillard, J. (1981). Simulacra and Simulation. University of Michigan Press.

  • Plato. (ca. 380 BCE). The Republic – Book VII: The Allegory of the Cave.

  • Descartes, R. (1641). Meditations on First Philosophy.

Back to blog