I'm not aware of any consensus that would apply to first life. That is my point. I'm not playing games. The definition of life is not a settled issue.
Certainly self-replication is part of any definition, but no one knows exactly what a minimal self-replicator would look like. That is another aspect of my point.
Your point is irrelevant. Abiogenesis is not falsifiable. Biogenesis, on the other hand, is eminently falsifiable. So, according to Popper one is science and one isn't. I disagree with that proposition but I fail to see how you can.