So, your "razor" cuts
away Hegel's "history,"
but it doesn't cut
the concept of "God?"
Your blade is convenient, it
cuts just where you want...
The razor cuts away all unecessary entities. What is the criterion of necessity? An explanation of all the data, of course. My personal opinion is that there is no alternative hypothesis which explains ALL the data. I'm sure we'll disagree, but most arguments about the existence of God are misplaced; the participants usually don't understand what they are really arguing about. The real debate is PRIOR to the razor, in the area where data is either preserved in the set or edited out of it.
The razor only cuts "god" away if he is not necessary in an explanation of all the data. Many people think he is necessary, many think he is not. That is the 5,000 year old debate.
William of Ockham was a Christian. You can agree or disagree with that conclusion, but to think that the rule he articulated automatically cuts out an unseen god is not to understand Ockham, or his logic, or the subsequent 800 years' debate.
I think the razor cuts "history" away because there is already an observed entity available to reside in the position of cause for the historical effects. I call that entity the "heart", after biblical language; you may call it "genome" or even "blip" if you like, but we don't need another entity called"history" for this specific set of effects.