No one believes life came into being by pure blind chance. That's a 19th Century materialist oversimplification of Darwinian evolution. If you believe there's nothing special about life itself and there's no unseen reality that guides it along, then life came into being by mere chance. If on the other hand, you believe life is the result of the purposeful interaction of a variety of complicated factors, then evolution is indeed purposeful. There are a number of different interpretations of evolution and a strictly materialist one is not the only one compatible with science. Its only where you deny the existence of natural laws that evolution ends and creationism and its intellectual progeny enters. The world allows for miracles but God chose not to interfere in order to preserve human free will and see to it Nature remained a world apart from that of Man. Nature and living things do not recognize any Higher Law or Truth and Beauty. Only human beings are capable of that and science has only added to our appreciation of the grandeur and complexity of the world we all inhabit.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
"No one believes life came into being by pure blind chance"
You cannot be serious? Millions do. Richard Dawkins, king of blind chance and Darwinism, does. I read his book...The Blind Watchmaker...its very good. I don't believe it but he is an intelligent man and persuavsive debater.
Cmon, lets not make such overtly ridiculous statements.