Well, I have to admit, that even if it was millions of years, and Darwinian[istic] evolution fits the facts better than 'young earth', God was still the driving and guiding factor behind it. Whatever is so, is so because God says so, not just deistically, but immanently.
True, but a Christian affirming Darwinism is not affirming 'no Creator', but rather, mutation and natural selection. It's a little like if I affirm Calvinism it doesn't mean I affirm Calvin, but the Scriptures. Those on this site who affirm Darwinistic Evolution, only refer to that principle—not to the Atheistic mentality that many Darwinists hold to.
Understand that, but there is really no fossil evidence for any transistional changes, and there is no way that nature by its own activity could ever alter Dna coding as would be reuired for species changes
I've heard that, but, I don't know that's true any more than I know that those things claimed to be evidence of Species' DNA 'migration' are true.
Evolution, considered as the plan of an infinitely wise [God] and executed under the control of his everywhere-present energies, can never be irreligious; can never exclude design, providence, grace, or miracles. Hence we repeat that what Christians have cause to consider with apprehension is not evolution as a working hypothesis of science dealing with facts, but evolution as a philosophical speculation professing to account for the origin, causes, and end of all things.
– A. A. Hodge, Introduction to Theism and Evolution by Joseph S. Van Dyke, 2nd ed. (New York: A. C. Armstrong & Son, 1886), xviii.
Would you accept that upon the Ark, God had say a pair of dogs, who within their Dna was all of the genetic code needed to have all of the various breeds of dogs in world?
Even Darwin and modern day ones like a Gould all admit that lack of any transition fossils very big problem to their views
