What are you talking about if anything the probability of life is pretty high. Everything else was derived from the first living organisms and we have it pretty well documented there is no mystery or order to it. It's just evolution that's all that is. We haven't found any life outside our own planet yet but we haven't look anywhere and there are already plenty of planet candidates that could host life and so on so forth. Life is probably pretty common in the universe, also order is relative to the observer.
How do you base the second choice on observation and facts of human experience? If something had a beginning then we have to assume it too had a beginning which eventually leads to a Paradox because what was first beginning and what was before everything began? Accepting world never began is just as mind-blowing and ridiculous but at least it offers some closure.
Dragging some superficial entities to explain the mysteries of the world has always been a common trend in all proto-religions of mankind especially the later ones like the Greek and NeoGreek religions before Abrahamic religions were on the rise. They all take the basic concept of a creator god or a group of gods and construct a personalized cult around them with fairytales and historic half-truths here and there. It is just so silly, to even entertain the idea that a godly creator gives a single shit about some little speck of dust in a universe so big and that he cares what kind of food you consume or how many times you pray to him daily, it is just so fucking stupid I can't take that shit seriously.
But on the contrary the idea behind a godly entity isn't even that big of a stretch. When we strip god of all the superficial bullshit and leave behind some kind of intelligent entity or just a passive force that govern the universe in some strange ways we lead ourselves down the path of neo-spiritualism. Some religions derive from that more detached view of the god but all of them still try to humanize it.
