Originally Posted by Rotaerk

The world is definitely complex. However this is not a revelation of God. In order for someone to reveal themselves, they need to do something which can be directly traced back to them.

If I were to dig a hole in the ground, anyone who didn't see me actually dig it would have no clue that I was the one who did it. By digging the hole, I have not revealed myself. There are many other possible causes of the hole being there. If I were to stand on the hole and shout "I DUG THIS!", that would be a revelation.

The complexity of the world certainly could be the result of a designer, but its mere existence is not a revelation of said designer. It only indicates that somehow, it came to be that way. There are many possible explanations, intelligent design being only one of them.



Correct, they are not incompatible, which is why I never mention science or evolution when debating the existence of God.




As I've indicated above, this is backwards reasoning. In terms of logic, let's let C be "The world is complex" and GE be "God exists".

What you seem to do is notice that C is true, get baffled by the complexity and jump to the nearest conclusion: that it must have been made by someone more intelligent than you, and deduce that GE is true. Bafflement is not a valid proof that C -> GE.

Now when you see more examples of C being true, they inspire the same bafflement and amazement, thus causing you to erroneously deduce the same thing. This is not how evidence works: Evidence is not that which makes you feel better about your beliefs.