"The concept that life did not originally arise on Earth is embodied in almost all human creation myths. These myths usually presume the special creation of life on Earth by one or more superior, intelligent, and all-powerful beings who themselves possess attributes of life such as sensation, thought and purposive movement. This concept does not explain the source of the initial creator and therefore does not explain life's origin." Strickberger's 'Evolution' p. 107.
I may not understand everything about the Creation, but after learning about the 'Big Bang' in an evolution class, I was almost giggling about how much more sense the Creation makes. Who says there has to be a beginning or an end? From what I gathered in the class, it's as if the 'Big Bang' suggests that chemicals appeared out of nowhere, eventually evolved into cells, and further evolved into intelligent life. Where did those chemicals come from? To take a page from Strickberger's 'Evolution', "this concept does not explain the source of the initial creator" of the chemicals, "and therefore does not explain life's origin."
"All the fools and learned and wise men from the beginning of creation, who say that [there must be] a beginning, prove that it must have an end." - J. Smith