How can a good God allow suffering

An intelligent designer would likely be too complex to have arisen by chance. Therefore such a designer would be bound to have been designed by another, anterior designer. Who himself would probably be too complex to have arisen by chance therefore the designer of our designer too was designed by some previous designer.

The ONLY way to avoid such an infinite regress is to assume that life as we know it, with its current complexity, emerged from a LESS COMPLEX form of "proto-life". Which itself emerged from an EVEN LESS COMPLEX for of proto-proto-life, etc...

Therefore, if you want to stick to ID, either you invoke an infinity of designers as the origin of life, or if you want to avoid that, you must postulate that the intelligent designer of life was LESS COMPLEX than what he designed. In other words, you must postulate that our maker is inferior to us, and then that his maker was inferior to him, etc. until you reach a point where the designer^n is so simple that he could have arisen by chance.

God is good that is not to be questioned. When Eve ate the apple and choose to die to sin that is what started the good going to selfish actions to evil thought, evil people, evil events. The brain that we have and God gave us to use, is all ours. The Holy Spirit that we get to receive is awesome because its our very own umbilical cord or conference call between The ALL MIGHTY and little ole us to begin a lifetime relationship with our Creator, so Thank You Jesus... To answer your question God is all good so where it is dark he is not even present. For example lets pretend there was a tragic kidnapping that ended in death of a innocent child, the person that made the evil choice to do that was using his brain (Easily persuaded to evil devil brains)) he had no thought, heart, or Holy Spirit in him of any good at all. Had he had any good in him he would have taken the thought to attempt it directly out of his brain and made the choice to never allow the devil or any evil of our own minds to take over our good in us. The human brain when untrained to think positive or never accepting good, God, Spirituality, kindness, integrity, or never being taught right from wrong can become just as evil as the devil I believe. The serial killers that we read about I am sure spend all of their brain space on evil all the time so when we think it, then we say it, then we lust over it, leading to actually doing whether it be good or bad our brain made the choice not our Spirit which is our connection to God or Good. To be good is not mean Holy of Holys or church every Sunday it means we almost always have compassion, we love the feeling of doing the right think next and treating others as we would also like to be treated and comforted.

Or what makes perfect since is God is EVERYTHING and EVERYBODY some how some way

That's called "nature."

You call that a conclusion? Seems to be? At least in principle? The 'Power of Reproduction' is the magic sauce? Isn't that rather circular? Life reproduces so because of that, life can create itself, because reproduction is inevitable, because - of its irreversibility!

And you call inference of intelligence by design unsatisfying?
And just why do we require 'satisfaction'?
I'm sure there's an evolutionary answer to that...
But I bet it's not satisfying.

Every scientific 'advance' poses further questions for research. The 'satisfaction' is in the unfolding journey, not in the destination.
ID is the antithesis of travelling at all.

Agreed, it is an attempt, just an unsuccessful one so far.
Its only evidence is that which it seeks to prove the origin of.
It happened, therefore, it can - Hopelesly circular reasoning.

No. Not unsuccessful ...promising as an explanatory factor in abiogenesis.

The argument about 'circular reasoning' is irrelevent. There has to be a focal phenomenon to be accounted for in order for an explanation to be attempted.
'Life' seems to be no research exception given, for example, that today I read in the news that offspring have successfully been produced from two female parents.

Of course theists/IDers have a potential retreat position in the event that a fully synthesisex lifeform is ever experimentally produced. They can play the game that 'Man is made in the image of God' and that human 'intelligence' was granted by the creator for 'His Purpose'. I would get ready for that retreat if I were you, just in case !

typo...SYNTHESIZED...

It's a great conclusion to the evidence presented and the argument implied. It's not a good conclusion to the investigation of abiogenesis, but it was never intended to be, so that's ok.

Yes, very successful and very promising. I would be surprised if this line of reasoning didn't end up being a factor in the process. And it may have general implications for biochemistry.

Yet another demonstration of the value of actually trying to understand how things work rather than just sweeping them under the magic carpet.

Then:


Then ros agrees:


Well first it doesn't explain abiogenesis and then it does. I'm not clear on where you stand on it now.

But since you do seem to agree that DKS is not limited to biological systems, and you see it as 'very successful', I don't see why you can't give an example outside of biology where it can be demonstrated. Where is the evidence?

Irrelevant?
Do you give every example of circular reasoning a pass or just your own pet theories?

Funny, many here criticize ID because they think that is the approach ID takes. So you think it's legit for DKS to take that approach but not ID. A bit of hypocracy there.

At least ID can point to concrete examples of the inference of design.

DKS has zero examples of what it can accomplish.

saw a slingshot being hauled on a crash wagon last week. It was in the hills of Western Maryland.
Need prts?
It was a nice color of like a metallic reddish orange

Got mine rolling again already. I tried to buy used parts from wreaks to fix but the hard parts I needed (suspension and engine parts) were relatively cheap so I bought new. The plastic body parts cost a fortune but I removed all them for the rat-rod conversion. Dropped a good 120 pounds of the stuff.

How's that bugeye coming?

We can play semantic games forever. The D in ID merely implies 'constructed to fulfil a purpose. So to argue that ID is about successful fulfilled purpose is itself 'circular reasoning'. On the other hand, to argue that DKS is a potential 'mechanism' which might account for what we call 'the evolution of biological structures' in terms of physics and chemistry is hardly 'circular' - it is an attempt at extrapolation from the known to the unknown. What could be a more worthy an endeavour ?
IDers try to play 'the sanctity card' . It's the same 'red card' which put Galileo under house arrest by the Inquisition. Get that bolt hole ready !

as a past chemist we have been aware that the habits of chemicals (and the very base of the applicability of the science ) is simply understanding that
1Chemicals are forever reacting according to a very limited numbr o rules in ply

2They can do it in defined sequence or in steps beholden to initially unrelated conditions or environments

To me the entire concept of DKS merely quantifies that life ans pre-life, using these very rules governing reactions, have resulted in truly unique thermodynamic state, wherein life, for whatever ita duration, defies the the laws of thermodynamics ( except for nutrient processing where an induced acidic state is usually central to digestion nd evacution).Lifes reactions are usually and mostly irreversible so they dont follow some of the basic tenets of the French discoverers oof how chemicals react.

I dont hVE MUCH time to read the details of the theoretical proposals in the origins of life, I truly believe we will find that several unrelated paths have led to the living state and the rapid transfer of most biochemistry rules was accomplished at the time of the last common ancestor to everything (waay back in the Proterozoic) by means proposed by people like margulis and Woese Capturing a proto-genome is quite easy, done in the lab all the time , all one has to do is know the genes and control the Eh/pH a bit.

Im getting a lot out of watching the research being done over at Planck Institute and several US centers where they are detailing the the life like "creation" of iron based helix structures of complex haem like minerals in the Mesabi and flinders Range iron deposits.

bugeye's basically done. pinting is finished and its a T-bird aqua. All we need to do over the winter is to figger out and cnc cut the damn engine mounts.

I have not faulted DKS for the attempt, it is an answer worth knowing.
So why do you not have the same respect for other approaches?
Your mockery of the endeavor you claim to respect says volumes.

I have not invoked 'the sanctity card' in any discussion of ID.
I have answered questions about the possible motives of a designer but only when asked.

In truth, it is the advocates of chance chemical abiogenesis who insist that all bow down to the current consensus of science (even though true scientists never do) and they do it without substantial evidence or experimental success.

you go back nd forth almost implying the religious basis of your inquiry. Yet your inquiry, had you been litening to yourself is merely gainsay of scientific evidence. Youve not presented ny evidence that supports ID .You have stated that scientific data can be interpreted to support ID but have not given a single example (I think Id like to take that example and see whether there is any evidence from other sciences that also support ID in that example)

It really lies in your court, not anyone elses.
Your methodology has been "I believe thus, prove me wrong". Thats not the way at all.

Now if you remain example-free, please do not retire to your tired assertions that I am merely engaging in irrelevancies and insults of your belief.