god(s) in heaven?

I mentioned in a comment in a previous post that I've been revisiting Astronomy of late.

I can understand why the heavenly bodies have been associated perennially with divinity - either as (literally) gods themselves, or as exemplars of Divine handicraft. As a non-believer, I have long agreed with what I think is the common view that the Argument from (apparent) Design is the strongest "motive of credibility" for theism. The firmament, at once spectacularly beautiful and orderly, is the quintessence of a god's artisanship and artistry.

The estimated extent of the Universe is staggering, and functionally incomprehensible: 100 Billion galaxies,
comprised of 5 Billion Trillion Stars. The awe inspired by the sidereal panorama is supplemented by celestial
statistics of unfathomable magnitude.

The night sky is an apt metaphor for life or existence, methinks - the (known) Kosmos is beyond vast, as disclosed by a skywards glance ... or a penetrating gaze into the structure of things (e.g., the eye), and/or the micro-kosmoi evident all around, such as tidepools - "Russian Dolls" receding to the edge of infinity, or (in Koestler's locution) holons within holons within holons ... Man is blessed and cursed to be a zōon logon - "rational animal," the animal that has the logos (power of speech, thought) - which hungers for a comprehensive view of The Whole that
is at once always "there" and forever beyond reach.

As the old saying goes, art(ifice) imitates Nature - and, we might add, falls short by an order of magnitude, though certain genii (Mozart, Vermeer, Plato, Tolstoy) might in their own ways be worthy mimics (respectable apprentices). The impulse to reading "design" in the fabric of Nature seems irresistible.

But what would it mean to have an unorderly world? World - Kosmos - inherently implies order, systematicity. Even a fashionably 18-century-style mechanistic universe exemplifies the order of mechanism. Is this to admit, then, that - as I've heard a sagacious fellow say - if anything exists, God exists? Or rather that, since the visible order of things is the starting point to be explained, to prejudice an explanation in terms of "design" is to beg the question?

Regardless, I'm willing to hazard the (harsh) judgment that whoever doesn't feel that there's something uncanny or mysterious about existence deserves the title of "flathead."