Why do you accept the "premise" that a molecule is alive? Someone is trying to slip a logical fallacy into the argument.
More likely, someone is lurking, waiting for a loosly worded phrase to be lawyered to death.
There is a difference between loose terminology and silly concepts. The Second Law is being incorrectly applied here. It's not just imprecise terminology; it's a fundamental misunderstanding.
Abiogenesis is not part of evolutionary theory, but there is no denying that most biologists believe it happened. Not having the technology to produce a stepwise phenomenon does no grant liberty to say it is impossible. Let's put it this way, if such a natural process is demonstrated, would it destroy your faith?