Heys Shay, thanks for being willing to share your struggles with these questions. I myself too, went through the journey and thankfully with the internet and great speakers like Ravi Zacharias, or John Lennox, I managed to get many of them addressed. Just to set some expectations, I won’t consider myself very well learned in this area, and am still studying about it myself, so please excuse me if I am not very technical, haha.
I think that the question itself has an assumption that it is commonly associated with when it is raised. Evolution (in this context) is usually viewed as atheistic evolution - where there is no greater being. There is definitely a form of theistic evolution at play (which will probably correspond to your point #4), but people usually view this question from an atheistic POV which is in counter to creation - which points to an existence of a creator. So the actual essence of the question is actually whether a supreme being (God) exists.
I loved how Ravi Zacharias shared about the many facets that point us to God’s existence:
The first is that no matter how we section physical concrete reality, we end up with a quantity that cannot explain its own existence. If all material quantities cannot explain their own existence, the only possibility for self-explanation would be something that is non-material.
Secondly, wherever we see intelligibility, we find intelligence behind it.
Thirdly, we intuitively know that our moral reasoning points to a moral framework within the universe. The very fact that the problem of evil is raised either by people or about people intimates that human beings have intrinsic worth.
Fourthly, the human experience in history and personal encounter sustains the reality of the supernatural.
In reply to the points that you put up, don’t mind if I change the order up so that it flows better to each other:
#2 - It is true that God is outside of time, and is not affected by it. He is after all the creator of time itself. The book of Psalms shared that:
Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; (Psalm 84:10)
Though the actual counting of the day itself may be more of an artistic license / figure of speech, it clearly shows that there is a difference in how “time” works. I likened it to us viewing time linearly whereas God seeing everything from the start and the end as a moment. This is also why you see verses like:
For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope. (Jeremiah 29:11)
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. (Revelation 22:13)
Also throughout the bible, you constantly see that God knows both the beginning and the end (in terms of our linear timeframe).
#1 - I do agree that it is possible that someone / something triggered the explosion in the first place. For myself, I see it that the person possible might be God. The interesting thing is that when we think about a Big Bang, we think about a loud explosion. Sound is involved. And in the bible, it states that:
Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. (Genesis 1:3)
Well, in my opinion, it’s coherent in terms of where the sound came from. Coupled with the fact that He created everything by speaking, and that time wasn’t linear from that perspective, it might’ve seemed to be a Big Bang actually.
#3 - I won’t say I know much about the Miller-Urey experiment, but based on what I have researched, it seemed to be the theory that the conditions of the early earth was suitable for more complex compounds to be created.
Vikram Sing (professor of Applied Mathematics, Cardiff, Wales) said that the probability of the human enzyme coming together by chance is 1 in 10^40,000. This is vastly more than the no. of atoms in the universe (estimated that the there are between 10^78 to 10^82, approximate, as claims vary). Even if the claims do vary, the probability has reached a point of impossibility.
It is only logical that it is easier to believe that a Creator exists rather than the human enzyme coming together by chance.
#4 - This holds on to the idea that time x matter x chance gave rise to intelligence. However, “chance” itself cannot be shown (even via experiment), since flipping a coin 9 times and getting heads, will still result in the 10th time itself being 50/50. So in a sense, it is something to try to classify what that cannot be explained, and pretty much not much different from being nothing at all.
Also if time x matter x chance creates intelligence, then it is no longer truth because truth is absolute, whereas the 3 factors are constantly changing. If truth no longer exist, then how will we ever know if it is truth that time x matter x chance created intelligence?
Ravi Zacharias has a session where he spoke at length into the area of atheistic evolution.
Lastly, I would like to share this video by John Lennox, where he shares that it is a flawed view to always think that science is intended to disprove the existence of God. Many times the question posed to theists is that science runs counter to the spiritual. He felt that science actually runs along with the spiritual, but the spiritual runs supreme.
Hope these sources help to shed some light into your questions, because I had the same questions myself.