I have to do a tad of correction here. First of all, the original singularity from which came the big bang had no atoms at all, it was far too hot. All the atoms were formed after the singularity began expanding and cooling, as the same amount of heat energy occupied more and more space, it became more thinly distributed, and thus the temperature went down. No one knows what existed before the singularity, and that statement is probably flawed. For all we know, time may very well bend in a way just like space does, as according to the general theory of relativity, they are extremely closely interrelated. (It's been a while since I read this, so I may not be 100 percent right on all points, but this should be pretty close) Thus, perhaps, time bends and never goes below the point of the singularity. There is something called an event horizon relating to this, only within the event horizon can we receive information from the object whose event horizon we are in. Thus, we can't know anything about what might have existed before the singularity, if indeed that is an accurate statement.
As for the origin of cells, I have read suspicions that certain compounds containing the correct molecules could have begun self replicating themselves, thus beginning the process of evolution. When one reaches the point of self-replicating moleules, the boundary between "life" and "non-life" can get pretty blurry to the casual observer.
Boliver, I have posted many holes in the religious "theory." (really, that word is too generous, story might be better) Once I hear a good response to these holes, then I might be willing to take creation as more than a myth.
Topic: Holes in scientific theory