I’m not denying that. @leonhardprintz eonhardprintz is making lots out of the fact that I don’t use his preferred metaphors, descriptions, and analogies. But unless he’s saying it’s impossible for God to design a mechanism like evolutionists describe, I don’t get any of the objections.
I’m not sure I buy evolution, personally, which is why all my statements start with the qualifier “IF evolution is true.” Like the church, I’m not interested in committing myself one way or the other. But I am denying the claims of true ‘randomness’. That’s pure magic being claimed as far as I’m concerned. Just coz you don’t see the strings or hand doesn’t mean the puppeteer isn’t behind the puppet.
Also, even if an angel could hypothetically fashion DNA, that would only imply the potential was already there to begin with, created by God. Otherwise the angel couldn’t do squat.
Unless someone is claiming angels or a creature gives being to anyone, all of these objections seem groundless to me, depending on projections more than anything. If God in fact used a mechanism as described in evolution, then he used something like an advance program. That’s not something I think can be denied with any honesty. You can deny that that is what God did, but you can’t deny that the process entails something very much like an intelligently designed program.
Even if it relies on the cosmos acting a certain way to effect certain changes, it’s still something designed.
I also don’t understand how intelligent design is somehow more insulting to the dignity our nature than randomness. It’s like saying it’s better to be a chair that was put together by accident of wind and an explosion than to be a chair that was put together following a deliberately designed program for it to exist as a chair. That’s…well…topsy turvy. I’d definitely rather be the deliberately designed chair.