That's fine, but similarly, all observations in the universe of real time shows that all things have a beginning. How do you reconcile this with ad infinitum application of "life begets life", unless you believe that life has always existed?
The fossil record suggest a biotic beginning. It is assumed that something caused this. What did?
In one scenario, the logical conclusion is that principles of life always existed because the characteristics of biotic life are caused by prebiotic life. The causes are homogeneous and the nomenclature of life/nonlife is merely practical. (Even in a world consisting exclusively of uniform homogeneous natural causes there is differentiation; everything is not everything). This view suggests that a laboratory in the future will generate life from nonliving matter, or that such an even will be discovered outside of the laboratory. We can say that the transition from nonlife to life is not time-specific and has unrestrictive application. Life is a function of nonlife. This leads to a very difficult problem: why does the fossil record suggest a beginning which suggests that life had an absolute beginning. The easy answer is, because conditions were not favorable. I think this question pushes the search in a new direction.
If this scenario is rejected because matter does not hold the causative agent for generating living matter, that means there is a heterogeneous causative agent which would at least have to be immaterial.
One of the suppositions, as I understand, in Behe's theory of irreducible complexity is that "favorable conditions" are logically inconsistent with a linear or homogeneous explanation.
Great question! I give the beginning of answer and I hope some of it is clear enough to make sense. If I revise it again and again, I may never post anything.