The entire point of science is to answer questions like this. Anyway, it did not "will" itself into existence. If abiogenesis is true, life was formed from regular chemical reactions. There's no willing or forcing itself into existence. As theists, we would believe God is behind it.
Just because science doesn't have the answer to every single empirical question (yet) does not mean it's all wrong. I will again bring up gravity. We don't know entirely how gravity works. It could be the hypothetical quantum graviton, it could be curvatures in spacetime, or something else. However, clearly gravity exists.
At this point you've been shown plenty of evidence for evolution so it's up to you to accept it or reject it. There isn't really much to say here except that with experimentation it would be possible to reproduce conditions that mimic the environment that life started in and could give us many answers to the questions you pose. What happens when abiogenesis research takes off and begins to answer those questions? Will there be an outright denial then too?
Once again, evolution has nothing to do with the origins of life, as has been established previously several times. Therefore, this point is moot. But a primordial environment is not "mere imagination." There is always empirical evidence to recreate it by looking on extreme places in Earth, other planets/moons (Titan is a good example), or laboratory recreations.
If you read words, you interpret it. There's no way around it. If you're going to claim "The scriptures speak to me their one truth," I will point you to the thousands of Protestant denominations who all have slightly (or widely) varying interpretations of the Bible. Arminianism, Calvinism, saved by faith alone, saved by faith and works, dispensationalism, non-dispensationalism, rapture, no rapture, pre-tribulation rapture, post-tribulation rapture... All gleaned from the same book. All interpreted from the same words. The Bible can be used to justify almost anything. There's a point though, where it just doesn't make sense anymore. Often the problem in those cases is context. Context of the book itself, context of the rest of the Bible, or even the context of the created world itself. Suffice it to say, a literal Genesis has a hard time fitting into the context of the physical world that we know today.
As "theists" haha. You know theistic evolution is atheistic evolution only with a God. You say empirical evidence (All knowledge comes from observation.) Tell me how you can "know" about the Single-Celled organism whenever there is no observable evidence for its existence? You see, Evolutionists studied the origins of mankind through ape-like structures but soon there was a point whenever it stopped and they do not know what happened before that, so they came up with something they "believed" to be so. You can't observe how this single-organism reproduced because it has already reproduced you cannot go back in time and see what happened. Whatever is stated about the past is an "assumption" unless there was someone who was there or their is written documentation back from the age-generation it came from. You know, the primordial soup theory has been around for over a 100 years and yet still no answers? Hmmm. What does that tell you?
In a letter to
Joseph Dalton Hooker on February 1, 1871,
[12] Charles Darwin addressed the question, suggesting that the original spark of life may have begun in a "warm little pond,
Wikipedia (^^^^)
Yet you try to justify evolution as the law of gravitation to show that saying the ToE is like saying Gravity does not exist. Only except the "foundation" of gravity can be explained with thorough detail. But as for the origin of life and then afterwards the diversity of life has complications and errors within itself with questions that could be raised for more than 100 years and yet still have answer. This is an unreliable source of a rescuing device to save the "assumption" of the ToE. You cannot accumulate the law of gravitation to evolution. We may not know how gravity exactly works but we know the basics of what gravity it because there is actual EMPIRICAL evidence for it. For example; drop an apple from height of 10 feet. Another key factor for gravity is because we are still witnessing it today. As for the theory of abiogenesis there is no definition of it, no explanation for it, it lived in an undefined environment, and the etc. We cannot test this theory therefore we cannot gain knowledge of this theory. It seems like to me, they made an assumption but forgot to give the rationality of the theory because it cannot be rationalized and for a worldview to be "logically" correct it must be rational within itself.
You refer Evolution to science which is totally false as it cannot explain the questions science made upon itself. Evolution is all assumptions because they have no been back in time to explain what happened, just because there are similarities in skull structure does not mean we are common ancestors within that "kind." A human may look like a Ape-like structure but it is still a human. A dog may look like some other kind of hideous animal but it is still a dog. A turtle that has a different shell on its back from the other one observed does not mean they came from their ancestors because they are turtles.
I can say the same thing to you, because this whole world has the same evidence, the same universe, same world, same plants and animals just same everything. We have evidence for creation it is up to you to accept it or reject it. See I can say the same thing because we all have the same world with the same evidence. Your foundation for interpreting the evidence is "sinful." Creation's foundation is based upon the Bible which is infallible and totally consistent within each artifact that is evidence. The only difference is, is how we interpret these "facts" according to our presuppositions within our worldview. But in your case, you are biased within yourself having two beliefs in one which in the "logical" realm to be rational you need to be unbiased.
Also those questions I stated will never be answered.
It would be impossible to test with experimentation the possibilities of abiogenesis. For, if we were able to test this supposed true "theory" how would we know what it is consisted of and what it looked like? If "natural selection" is about "survival of the fittest" how did this single-celled organism survive off of nothing for BILLIONS or MILLIONS of years with nothing to eat? What was the first life form being it REPRODUCED and how did it do so within itself? Whenever the diversity of species came about where did the land come from? and how did it get there? When the land came about did it need oxygen and how did it get here?
How could whenever the Big Bang started expanded, How big was the sun whenever it was first formed and what how did this blind force make it? (The Bible states Earth before Sun.) Since the Sun is using its energy and soon will disintegrate how big was the sun whenever it first was made and when was it actually made? If the universe is billions of years of old, how come the Blue stars in the universe use their fuel twice as fast as the sun but are ten times bigger than the sun and cannot last billions of years are still in the universe today? If the universe was billions of years old, science has stated the moon is moving away from the earth at a foot and a half I think. If the world was billions of years old, how close would the moon be to the earth?
You used to "re-create" but what did it look like? What was the defined environment it was in? Where did it originate? Ocean? Freshwater? Pond? Lake? Stream? Creek? What were its components inside the organism and outside the organism?
Okay, look. Whenever I read GENESIS, GOD SAYS, He spoke and IT WAS SO. Therefore IT IS! I do not question GOD's authority. If you say, Well this is the problem. Well, If I have to question the Creation by GOD the Creator. Why don't we just question God actually dying on the cross for a remission of sins? I know he did, and I know his creation is true. I asked him to save me and he did and I am a new creature just like his Promise states (2 Corinthians 5:17). I let it speak to me, I do not tell God what happened by saying evolution is the answer for the origins not the biblical account of Creation because this is just impossible. Of course it is for mankind to do such a thing, but we are TALKING ABOUT JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD!
