>So both the DNA and proteins must have been functional from the beginning in order for evolution to start, otherwise life could not exist because one can't exist without the other.

I don't think that's necessarily true.

Replicators, molecules that can build replicas of themselves from materials in the environment, could be made much more primitavely than the scheme you described.

Once these primitave replicators exist, evolution starts, and DNA might show up later on.

Here, I think, is the heart of the matter:

Science is problem solving, nothing more and nothing less. If you have a problem, and you have possible answers, it is intellectually dishonest to reject all the answers. Just pick one. Look at the evidence, look at the strengths and weaknesses of the answers, and draw your conclusion.

You don't need to believe it is true, you don't need to assume there are no flaws with the answer, and you don't need to assume that tomarrow you'll even accept the same answer because a better one might come along.

Now, knowing that, I pose the problem to you: how did human beings come to exist on Earth?

One answer is evolution: we evolved from simpler life forms.

Another answer is creation: God did it.

Obviouslly, I see a strength in the evolution answer in that it gives us some details as opposed to just pushing it off into the hands of a supernatural being.

But what's important is what you currently accept. What is your answer and why?