Well first of all, the elephant in the room: This is clearly a false dichotomy. Even if we were to assume that all of these points are true it wouldn't follow that god doesn't exist (a deist would even say that god himself only started the universe and hasn't interfered since). On the other hand, disproving any of these points wouldn't automatically mean that god exists. And especially not any specific god/gods humanity has been worshipping. This is basic logic OP!
Now to a few of these points:
4. ANY kind of beneficial mutation will obviously help an organism to survive and reproduce (beneficial meaning in the context of the organisms' current environment of course). This is the non-stochastical part of natural selection so often ignored by creationists. And even if it doesn't (because of random factors), as long as there is life and as long as there are mutations, chances are that at one point a beneficial one will have time to have an effect on a population.
5. It couldn't because a harmful mutation will a) be selected out of a population fairly quickly under normal circumstances, b) it's impossible for every species to get the same harmful mutation at the same time and also be affected by it the same way (I dare even say that for most species it wouldn't have any effect at all if this miracle would happen).
6. You never heard of neutral molecular evolution, right? Most mutations DON'T have any effect on the phenotype and are therefore not a target for selection. The few that are deleterious are selected out most of the time. The VERY few that are beneficial therefore will have quite an impact on a population. Mutation rates are high enough for at least a few beneficial mutations to happen in most populations over time.
7. Yes it can. You just don't want it to be like that. It's as if you said: "Molecular and electron activity alone can never generate the output of my computer screen". It's a thinly veiled argument of incredulity. I would suggest reading up on emergent properties of systems. Hell, it has been suggested that life itself might just be an emergent property of the physical laws and systems of our universe.
8. Do you want to say that you wrote this post totally out of context? That your upbringing, your religious beliefs most likely stemming from that, your ignorance of modern science, your fear that you are meaningless in this great universe and your own need to device some kind of "proof" for your god has NOTHING to do with writing your post? Because otherwise I would say that it definitely was a consequence of previous events and most likely inevitable too. It's also once again a false dichotomy. Free will doesn't have to mean that we aren't determined by cause and effect-relations. Look up compatibilism and perhabs a bit of chaos theory as well (chaos being determined but unforeseeable and us seemingly living in a chaotic universe from what we can tell).
I won't even get into 1-3, I think others did a good job on that already.