Sure. You'd need a new biological paradigm where children are randomized instead of combining traits from their parents.

For example, imagine if, when two humans have a child, it's basically a random human child with no direct relation to the mother or father. Your Creator figure would need to define the boundaries of randomness, while also preventing mutations.

This eliminates evolution because the fitness of a parent won't impact the fitness of a child.

A couple of notes:

Just eliminating mutations isn't sufficient prevent evolution entirely, as species would still specialize based on fitness within their possible genomes.

You would still see extinctions, and this would cause species to expand into areas they might not be optimized for. For example, say if a scavenger species went extinct. That opens up an ecological niche, and you would see a non-specialized species start to take advantage of that energy source. They wouldn't be good at it, of course, but it would still happen.

Sure. You'd need a new biological paradigm where children are randomized instead of combining traits from their parents.

For example, imagine if, when two humans have a child, it's basically a random human child with no direct relation to the mother or father. Your Creator figure would need to define the boundaries of randomness, while also preventing mutations.

This eliminates evolution because the fitness of a parent won't impact the fitness of a child.

A couple of notes:

Just eliminating mutations isn't sufficient to prevent evolution entirely, as species would still specialize based on fitness within their current genomes.

You would still see extinctions, and this would cause species to expand into areas they might not be optimized for. For example, say if a scavenger species went extinct. That opens up an ecological niche, and you would see a non-specialized species start to take advantage of that energy source. They wouldn't be good at it, of course, but it would still happen.