"Darwin had a theory. Specifically he had a theory to explain the diversity of life that we see around us. It is a theory because it makes predictions, is testable and is falsifiable... However, while ID claims to be a theory, it is not. It is not a theory because it makes no testable, falsifiable predictions."
While there are conflicting views within the ID camp, I have made an ID centric hypothesis which is testable and falsifiable. I do not describe ID as a theory because, in addition to your criteria, we also need some level of verification. This could take the form of test results or a statistical model. Neither of these have been accomplished.
My testable, falsifiable ID statement is:
"Due to information complexity and interdependence, no living organism can ever spontaneously arise from lifeless matter which exists in a naturally occurring state, but life can be created."
For more elaboration and defense of this claim please see an earlier post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1543993/posts?page=1488#1488
Have fun fulfilling this part of the prediction. You will have to anticipate every possible scenario for unguided abiogenesis.