Actually, you cannot know that.
Discussion
Why?
You can deeply believe you were not formed randomly, but you lack evidence. Therefore, you cannot know you were not formed randomly. Any attempt at gathering evidence requires science, and science says life on earth is random and we humans evolved over the eons through natural selection. It is also possible that our religious beliefs and evolutionary science might both be wrong. However, to know something is true requires evidence, while believing something to be true does not.
I believe any time science and my religion (Catholic) are in conflict, it means my understanding of one or the other is faulty. If you believe in an orderly God, and not one of chaos, then it follows that the Universe should be explainable and orderly. Even chaos is subject to laws, and randomness is only a perception caused by limited understanding.
That being said, this Universe being as carefully tuned as it is to sustain the evolution and survival of life is such a long shot, that it could be said to be statistically impossible. Both the religious and the "scientific" minded at that point revert to theories (non-scientific ones) about the answer to that problem. Those who do not believe in a god will point to things like multiverse theory - every possible universe exists - whereas the religious can say that God kicked things off just the right way at the time of the big bang.
Neither is falsifiable, testable, or observable, and at the end of the day unscientific. Accepting God does not necessitate rejecting science though, and accepting science still leaves room for God.
Excellent! My take on your post is, a human mind is too puny to understand, so don’t get all worked up. When ANYONE tries to tell you they understand the mystery and then want you to behave accordingly, run, no matter how big the hair or megachurch parking lot. Again, I paraphrase.
It will be fascinating to see what AIs come up with on these eternal cosmological questions.
If we achieve AGI, I am also very curious to see how it considers things like this. Of course, it’s hard to predict what that AGI will look like. I think most people think of it as an emotionless machine with access to vast amounts of information. From that perspective, it would offer an insight that (most) humans cannot.
It is far from obvious to me that AGI will look like that though. We have such a small understanding of consciousness that it is hard to know what parts of the human experience are requirements of a truly sentient being. Will AGI have emotion? Will it *feel*?
If AGI feels, and can think on an emotional level, might it also choose a religion? Could it be swayed on policies by emotionally charged language and images?
Who knows? But it’s a fascinating thing to consider, and I share your anticipation to see how it turns out.
Did you ask forgiveness from God for raping a minor? https://www.offenderradar.com/offender-details/nathan-davies-of-tennessee-363611