I am an evolutionist. I belive in God. The two positions are not contradictory. An omnipotent God does not need to resort to ID.
An omnipotent God does not need to resort to ID.
You are implying he would resort to evolution? Why?
I'm starting to wonder if you are just playing Devil's Advocate.
"I am an evolutionist. I belive in God. The two positions are not contradictory. An omnipotent God does not need to resort to ID."
But an omnipotent God would certainly apply some kind of intelligent design somewhere, somehow, some way, don't you think? (Consider that a rhetorical question if you wish.)
Many who hold your view apparently think He designed in all the intelligence before the Big Bang, or at least before the first living cell arose, but I don't see why he would constrain Himself that way.
I just hope you are aware that many "hard-core" evolutionists are athiests who see the theory of evolution as their greatest tool. Many of them will tell you, "go ahead and believe in God if you need a psychological crutch, but He is totally superflous to our understanding of how the world works." I suggest you think about whether you are unwittingly promoting their cause.
If you have time, let me suggest in good faith that you read the book Not By Chance by Lee Spetner. Spetner is a professor emeritus of information theory from MIT who argues against the Neo-Darwinian Theory.
You might also check out a book called Tornado In a Junkyard by James Perloff. Perloff is a former hard-core athiest who changed his tune. This book has some material that absolutely amazed me. Toward the end of the book he even presents arguments for young-earth creationism. Now, even I had always considered that view absurd, but I want to tell you that I now realize its not as absurd as I once thought. I'm not saying I believe it, I'm just saying there is a seemingly rational scientific argument for it, and that in itself "blows my mind," as they say. I think you might be surprized.