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.

If the only thing that physically existed, at this time, is this singularity contained in one perfect universe wide particle (which must be objectively perfect because it is the only physical thing with nothing to compare it to). And, the intelligence to manipulate it (God), exists in this one simple perfect particle, then this fulfills your requirement that the creator of the universe must be simple.

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)

I have given many examples over the years.

To be a creator this god would have to exist outside of this simple perfect particle not inside of it.

Something else would have had to create this god.

The something else that created "this god" is human imagination.

Notice that different cultures created different gods. It's all part of human DNA to want a god(s) to exist. I find it fascinating that the christian god is only 2,000 years old, and humanity have been around for some 200,000 years, and we evolved from primates.

Julius Wellhausen, the 19th century German scholar responsible for the classical form of the documentary hypothesis, did not attempt to date J more precisely than the monarchical period of Israel's history.[13] In 1938 Gerhard von Rad placed J at the court of Solomon, c. 950 BCE, and argued that his purpose in writing was to provide a theological justification for the unified state created by Solomon's father, David.[14] This was generally accepted until a crucial 1976 study by H. H. Schmid, Der sogenannte Jahwist ("The So-called Yahwist"), argued that J knew the prophetic books of the 8th and 7th centuries BCE, while the prophets did not know the traditions of the Torah, meaning J could not be earlier than the 7th century.[15] A number of current theories place J even later, in the exilic and/or post-exilic period (6th–5th centuries BCE).[16]

1. Simple negation, you say "You are wrong", but give no argument to support it.

2. Your source (person or publication) has no credibility, again with no supporting argument.

If from a respected publication, you say that particular paper or scientist is an outlier and does not represent mainstream science.

Does this logically fulfill your requirements for an Intelligent designer in a scientific way?

If you had provided any evidence, I would have noticed it.

Leadfoot Quote:
"If [my argument] from a respected publication, you say that particular paper or scientist is an outlier and does not represent mainstream science.
"

Naaah. Youve missed the point entirely . When I take on a paper, I always look at its source. I often note that your rferences from scientific literature had been "Filtered" through ID pubs like "EVOLUTION" or the Discovery Institutes many writers.

. If the source has no religious affiliation (D. Berlinski, a secular Jew for example) you say he is tainted by being associated with the Discovery Institute.

The point you refuse to get is that all words we apply to what we see as 'the universe' are coined for human purposes. That includes all things from 'rocks' to 'gods'.

The presumed persistance of things is relative to their 'persistant' functionality in terms of part or all of human lifespans, since all is physically in flux. The hope that 'God' is an exception to this flux is merely an opiate embraced in an attempt to transcend the brevity of human lifespans, and so too is the reverse logic ...'in the beginning was the WORD'... etc.

If the universe existed as a single particle with no order to it. (a singularity) as the Big Bang theory suggests, then all that existed was a single particle that was quite dense containing everything necessary for our universe to exist except order.

If the only thing that physically existed, at this time, is this singularity contained in one perfect universe wide particle (which must be objectively perfect because it is the only physical thing with nothing to compare it to). And, the intelligence to manipulate it (God), exists in this one simple perfect particle, then this fulfills your requirement that the creator of the universe must be simple.

And, since this single particle contains the entire universe and is controlled by a single simple intelligence that makes that intelligence simple and Omnipotent.

This also coincides with Gen 1: in the Bible where it describes the singularity as a "formless void".

Gen 1:1 In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, 2 the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Order (which is what matter and the space time continuum are) is created in the universe by, separating the universe into quarks, virtual quarks, electrons and photons (quantum of space), as quantum mechanics suggests.

This is described in the next chapters of Genesis.

Gen 1:3 “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so. 8 God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas.

This is describing how the universe was divided up into the particles, virtual particles and space time continuum we observe today.

This philosophical argument of the physical requirements established by science, is covered in great detail by Robert Spitzer in his book "New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy" with some additions of my own.

But theists like you have a vested interest in sticking with the word magic of their chosen opiate. Cold turkey is not an option for those whose 'eternal life' is at stake ! Twisted Evil