A theory that has topped the evolutionary pre-DNA theories, the Metabolism Theory, has been permanently debunked in a study released by a team of influential scientists and published in the Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences. One of the greatest problems atheistic evolution faces in the beginning of life is RNA or DNA replication. This is a problem mentioned by former atheist Antony Flew in There Is A God which helped lead him out of atheism.
Evolution requires that one of the first cells to exist must have been able to start a continual cycle of replication. Supporters of atheistic evolution hypothesize that there must be some connection or series of steps between that first cell and the non-biological substance from which it evolved. Until this study the foremost theory was the Metabolism theory which “allows for adaptation and evolution without any molecular replication.” There were also a number of other related theories that have now crumbled after this new research has come to light. These scientists proved that these “chemical networks” at the base of the Metabolism theory actually degrade instead of moving higher up the evolutionary tree. The report says at this time “no plausible chemical explanation exists for how these processes occurred.”
There must have been an agent to bring the biological structures of replication and reproduction into existence. There is no other plausible answer. Without an agent the first big problem is a pathway for a non-living substance to become a living substance by chance, but then the more complex problem is this new living substance must have had the biological structure to perpetually replicate itself. These two stand or fall together, because you cannot have one without the other and still have evolution. All the steps had to happen in perfect order the first time to bring non-living matter all the way to living replicating existence. The probability of this happening by chance is so infinitesimally close to 0 as to make the notion ludicrous.
Some say I shouldn't argue from the gaps in evolutionary theory... but this isn't a developmental gap in the process of evolution, it is a primary question upon which agency in evolution rests, and is a fundamental disagreement between deism and atheism. The numbers, logic, and revelation are on the side of deism. There is a Creator.