God and complexity

I'm perplexed.

I find the argument made by Dawkins in his book "The Selfish Gene" compelling. He argues that there are two possible states of play for the start of the universe:

EITHER

1.) An intelligent god came into existence and then created unthinking matter and intelligent life

OR

2.) A universe of unthinking matter came into existence and intelligent live evolved naturally

The argument is simple:

Argument (2), let's call it: the "big bang hypothesis" is much less complex and therefore far more probable than Argument 1 (1), which we will call: "the god hypothesis." This is because "the god hypothesis" posits god's intelligence at the start and thus increases the complexity of the problem, by adding a perfectly designed and intelligent designer to an already complex situation.

But is God necessarily more complex than the material universe?

The counter-argument posited by those who have faith is that god does not need to be complex because God exists outside of the material realm. This means that he is not materially complex in the same way that the universe is.

At this point my head begins to hurt, because personally I don't find the argument compelling for the following reasons:

1.) We live in the material world. It is all we know! Therefore, calling god "immaterial" is extricating him from our understanding of complexity and abstracting him from any comparison with the material complexity of the universe.

2.) Intelligence is an extra layer of complexity. Although it is possible to argue that the "knowledge" inbuilt in the "design" of the universe is akin to intelligence. But surely a designer would have to be more complex than his design? Wouldn't he?

The remaining solution, is, I feel, to water down the complexity of god:

To counter the problem of "material complexity" our God would have to be immaterial (if we can accept such notions).

Additionally, to sidestep the problem of intelligence, our god would, at the very least, be of an intelligence akin to the "inbuilt" knowledge of the universe. For instance: Our god's function would be limited to starting the big bang and adjusting the parameters of the universe. This would make him a far cry from the Old Testament God of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence.

So in order to allow God, according to this argument, we have to accept that our version of god is limited... But the problem we then face is that perhaps our new conception of "god" is so watered down as to be a mere philosophical shadow. A semantic explanatory presence replacing the hole where an explanation of our beginnings would fit.

Is there room for spirituality in this conception? Is there more room for a god than I allow?

I would like to think that there is.

As I'm sure most atheists would admit: I hope I'm very wrong.