Evolution theory relies on the origin of life being spontaneous abiogenesis. Darwin admitted that himself. To admit otherwise is to admit the non-necessity of the purely material sequence of events.
And evolution may or may not require belief, depending on which definition of "evolution" you are referring to.
There are about 9 definitions in scientific literature. The simplest is "fact". The more elaborate ones are speculative.
The elasticity of the term is what you are utilizing when you present it in black and white terms.
In other fields, that is called "propaganda".
No evolutionary biologist thinks life was spontaneous.
Darwin was right about one thing, the theory grew since him.
the evidence points that he was right about common descent.
No one is sure life began from just one LUCA though.
The latest cutting edge thought is that there may have been 3 that shared DNA/RNA in development. No one is sure there was no exterior intervention. We just can't pin it down yet.
ID maybe true, but nothing has been presented to validate it.
But it is fringe science , unless it can come up with real evidence it will remain so.Personally I haven't ruled out the possibility. Life could be a construct, but without something that points to it. It is like speculation into what was before time.
Fortunately if life is a construct, we should eventually be able to find something that points to it. I have my doubts about that and ever understanding "before time".