Proteins in molecular machines often have homologues in other systems. Shared sequences, structures, and functions provide evidence that biological components have evolutionary histories rather than appearing independently in their present forms.
Homology is powerful evidence of evolutionary relationship. A design argument that ignores these relationships would fail to account for an important part of the biological evidence.
Homology can establish or strongly support common ancestry and can help reconstruct the modification of components through time. It therefore contributes substantially to evolutionary explanations of molecular machinery.
But homology answers some questions more directly than others. Establishing that two components share ancestry does not by itself reconstruct the entire sequence by which an integrated system arose, nor does it alone explain the origin of the earliest member of the homologous family.
Where does evidence of common ancestry provide a sufficient historical explanation, and where are additional mechanisms and intermediate stages still required?