You are extending the idea too far.
We'll see...
I know that the combination of events that created a stable earth are extremely rare.
How do you know that?
In fact, it is currently beleived that terrestrial planets, such as ours, are quite common throughout the galaxy.
We have shown how that happened on the computer.
It's still based off of a theory.
Still, is that just random events that pop up around the rare star?
Is there any evidence that shows otherwise?
If it is just random, that does not affect my faith in God.
It should if one makes the claim that god was needed for planets to form. If I held to that belief, and someone showed me planets forming naturally, I'd question why I believe in god in the first place.
In the same way, proving abiogenesis would not prove or disprove God.
If one is using god in the same manner as the planets, then abiogenesis would make me question why I believe in god.
"I believe it was random events." or "I believe it was guided by God."
Since there is no evidence for god, supernatural guidance doesn't seem necessary. The only evidence for god would be by inference. But that would mean that the evidence for god is tenative and what god is inferred to, once proven to be natural, would remove god from the equation.
At that point one would have to question why one believes in god to begin with.
It's the god of the gaps argument.
Some of the hypothesis will never be proven and they will stay at this belief level.
Which hypothesis specifically?
- Oni
If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
~George Carlin