Endosymbiosis of mitochondria and chloroplasts is supported by several independent lines of research.
DNA similarity denotes common ancestry in paternity tests across the nation every day. But yes, if mitochondria and chloroplasts were created by God inside all eukaryotes at the moment of their own creation, God designed them to look exactly as if they were formerly symbiotic bacteria in terms of size, structure, DNA sequence, types of proteins, and ribosomes.
So if God is under complete control of random processes in a slot machine determining if you win or lose, why then is God supposedly unable to control the “random processes” that are involved in generating genetic variability, as well as the non random processes whereby this variability is selected for or against?
I appreciate the civil, measured tone of your last response to me.
Now, at the end of your response you said “why then is God supposedly unable to control the “random processes” that are involved in generating genetic variability, as well as the non random processes whereby this variability is selected for or against?”.
First of all, having genetic VARIABILTY to “select” from is not enough. You need increased genetic FUNCTION. A bacterium “evolving” the ability to digest a synthetic – nylon – adds an extraordinary variety to its diet but how do you get a digestive system to begin with? Genetic changes aren’t enough. How do you get the gene itself? Changes to one’s vision aren’t enough. Do you SEE at all?
As far as God actually controlling all the mutating, if He does, then in this context we’ll need to use some word other than “random”. And the evolutionists will have to change the active ingredient in their story to something like “trillions and trillions of supernatural interventions/miracles – formerly considered to be random mutations acted on by natural selection – were performed over billions of years…” Or, alternatively, “God infused all of nature – both inanimate things (e.g. atoms) and animate things (e.g. bacteria) – with intelligence and will, to the point that they knowingly orchestrated (e.g. your words: “Why would a bacteria under stress INTENTIONALLY increase its mutation rate?”, “Now why again would a bacteria under stress WANT to increase its mutation rate?”) not just neutral changes but increasingly rich systems of information creation, transmission, interpretation and action which build all the astoundingly complex life forms of our planet.”
Of course, both of the above positions would be statements of faith, not of science, since we’ve never seen God nor have we observed the “miraculous” origination of animate things from inanimate things nor the origination of one kind of animate thing from another kind (e.g. Mitochondria evolving from bacteria). And we haven’t managed to get any interviews with any atoms or bacteria where they could tell us what their plans are and why.
I take as a matter of faith that God allows randomness in some processes. Truly random in the sense of being undirected and unpredictable. In a certain sense, “free”. Kind of like my belief in mankind’s God-given free will. I believe God KNOWS beforehand how we’ll exercise our will, but He DOESN’T CONTROL our will. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be FREE, and we’d be pre-programmed robots and what’s the point? No, WE never know for sure what human beings will do, but we sure have DESIGNED some incredible things with our God-given INTELLIGENCE. However, I take as a matter of faith that atoms and bacteria and bacterial mutations (and the “Mother Nature” that “selects” the mutational “winners”) do NOT have intelligence. And without that intelligence, a mutational process, although “free”/UNcontrolled/random, will never result in any higher forms of life.
And nothing in the realm of scientific discovery to date has led me to doubt this faith.