Both views (all views) of origins rely on faith.

The first two laws of thermodynamics, however, respectively argue against the ideas that matter is eternal and that it increases in complexity or gains organization with time. Organization does not occur by accident but by intent. Even given the assumption that organization occurred, if left on its own, it would soon become disorganized without continued, intelligent, intentional input.

If life began from purely naturalistic causes, doesn’t it stand to reason that science would be able to determine that cause or at least define it. We have not and cannot do either.

Why have all attempts to reproduce life in laboratories failed? Doesn’t it make sense to believe that if all life originated right here in this physical world and is dependent only upon what is right here in front of us, that its cause and nature would be evident to our best minds and efforts?

Even if we could produce life in a lab, wouldn’t that only prove that it requires Intelligence to do so?

How can science or anything in the physical world, explain the rise of mentality, thought and consciousness? It cannot even begin to touch on these realities.

If we assumed the existence of matter and that it found its way into forming the first life form, what did that first life eat? What mechanism would it have had to consume anything at all much less have any compulsion to ingest something? How did this first life come into being complete with the mechanical structures necessary to reproduce and also have the compulsion as well as the information necessary to reproduce?

We have absolutely no idea how to answer any of these or any one of a world of such questions.

Why is it, however, that any consideration of a cause outside of this physical world is met with such vehemence that those who even consider the possibility of looking into the idea of a creator are immediately bullied into silence?

Shouldn’t we fearlessly apply objective research in that direction to at least rule out the possibility of a creator if in fact there was not one in the beginning?

Stifling such research is not science. That’s ideological tyranny.