“because Darwin knew he had no ‘scientific’ explanation for the origin of life”
Etc..
Yes. But what is referred to as abiogenesis is part and parcel of evolutionary theory, without the qualifying “Darwinian evolution”.
The irony is that modern proselytizers of evolution don’t understand or know that in citing a differentiation between evolution and abiogenesis, as they call it, is in itself a form creationism.
Either one believes there is some sort of magical or supernatural start where life exists and then Natural selection follows to create the “diversity of life forms”, as you put it, or one believes the same forces and processes did it all.
If you reread my original post; you’ll find that I was careful to put in the qualifiers. That was my whole point. Too many people do lump the origin of life in with the origin of species — they’re two very different things. Without consistent definitions of terms; reasonable debate is impossible.
Darwin knew he had no ‘scientific’ answer to the question of the origin of life. Too many of his self-professed acolytes do not know that fact — and, therefore, make outlandish claims in Darwin’s name. Creationism is a Faith-based explanation — and so is every other explanation to date (and, perhaps for all time).