That's an 'interesting' way of interpreting Spencer's quote, Pete. But that is how someone constructing a sermon might do it.

(I personally own Spencer's major work and find it is not exactly what serious scientists refer to these days. He is historically interesting, but not mainstream.)

The thing about your remark: " the fossil record is largely lacking in anything evidencing gradualistic change .i have quoted evolutionists admitting as much." is: We are not lucky enough to have every stage in evolution laid out. Most animals did not die 'conveniently'. But, it is NOT true that we do not see "gradualistic change". We do not see ALL stages of it, but we can date many, many fossils and see THAT the changes represent evolutionary progress. For some commoner species, we actually do see a fairly representative 'gradual' series!
(All that 'evolutionists' admit is, as I have said, that we don't have every step.... and if we did, there would not be enough museums in the world to hold millions of specimens.)

As to abiogenesis, it is quite possible! Science has synthesized certain amino acids and shown how they could combine.

from the Wikipedia article:(read it and the links in it- it says much more)
"Most amino acids, often called "the building blocks of life", were shown to be synthesized in the Miller–Urey experiment and similar experiments that involved the simulation some of the hypothetical conditions of the early Earth. Other equally fundamental biochemicals, such as nucleotides and saccharides can arise in a similar manner."

Perhaps "God" controlled what happened way back then - we can't test THAT in a laboratory.... but it did happen.