Whether or not you accept it as such, you are making a statement of "faith".
And concerning evidence - what evidence do we have that life can appear spontaneously? Even Hawking gives this little credence:
We do not know how DNA molecules first appeared. The chances against a DNA molecule arising by random fluctuations are very small. Some people have therefore suggested that life came to Earth from elsewhere, and that there are seeds of life floating round in the galaxy. However, it seems unlikely that DNA could survive for long in the radiation in space.
http://www.hawking.org.uk/life-in-the-universe.html
It's almost humorous how this point is give such short shrift; in essence he simply kicks the can down the cosmological road.
Which leaves us where? If it is "unlikely" that life can spontaneously generate, we must consider the possibility that life was generated intentionally.
Logically (reasonably) we must then consider the possibility of a Creator.
When Hawking talks about physics or cosmology, I pretty much assume he’s right. He’s probably well read on biology but I doubt he knows more then most amateurs. No evolutionary biologist has ever claimed dna came out of some primordial ooze, there are much simpler compounds that are capable of copying themselves. Add to that the shear scale of time, a billion years, that it had to occur then yes, life could have come from nothing.
Now short of building a time machine I grant we will never know that for sure but again, I have to use the best evidence