Not necessarily. Natural selection and other natural processes might be acting in response to a nomological (lawful) order. Think in terms of Feynman's path integral formulation. The particle is said to take every path and that the most probable path is the one where all the other paths mathematically cancel themselves out. Natural selection might be the most probable path based on the 'objectives' that God has setforth. Evolution might have nothing to do with trial and error, instead it might be the path which best reflects God's action in the world. For example, if God's action is minimal to obtain the path's destination, then the world we see is what you might expect from a minimalist approach to creation.

The writer seems to have one of the brightest abilities to express complex notions that I have read. The brightness is a kind of prettiness which, like a decorated Christmas tree, is not actually found in nature, but it has a kind of appeal.
The ideas in italics above seem incomplete somehow. Questions arise. Will these questions be answered? By experience, we know that Harv only answers questions about "those big ideas"
when they are posed in a flattering way which hints the ideas are already being accepted in part. But those ideas in italics above are completely devoid of functional biology and instead substitute a "priest's option" kind of magical thinking.
Mike