jj, have you noticed that the popular argument for ID is based upon how good the world currently is? How all things are so 'perfect' that there must be a Designer?
Would you agree with these claims?
Yes, this is a very sound and logical argument. The irreducible complexity in living things and the complexity of the food chain make an Intelligent Designer a logical conclusion. The human brain is vastly more complex than the world’s best supercomputers and yet no one assumes that a computer didn’t have a designer. The only problem I see with the Intelligent Design Movement is that they fail to specifically name the Designer.
I haven't read the entire thread, but if you believe the world used to have a different and better system in place, which obviously isn't here now, why would you argue so much against the ToE?
Does it matter how God changed things from the original creation, as long as you are sure that there WAS change?
Yes God originally created the Earth “very good”. That “perfection” that you and I see that requires a Designer is still a reflection of that original “very good” creation. But you and I both know that the world we live in is far from perfect. That “change” that first started when Adam was disobedient to God (sinned) and God cursed the Earth because of Adam’s sin. I don’t disagree with mutations, natural selection and speciation. I disagree with molecules to man Darwinian Evolution. Darwinian Evolution contradicts the Bible and I accept the Word of God over the word of man.
Yes, how the change happened and which direction the change is heading is very important. The changes we see in nature are a downward progression. This is consistent with God creating all plants, animals and humans “very good” and since degenerating as a result of the curse.