When contemplating an idea such as this, it is vital to keep in mind the balance that must be retained between sensory perception and intuitive perception. By our intuition, we would like to think that there is a higher being that watches out for us and that put the stars into place. However, our sensory perceptions cause us to believe that scientifically, there cannot be a God and that all things came to be through a random process that we would like to be identified by scientific principle.
The issue with both of these sides of the coin, per se, is in that of their slavery unto themselves. If one is to base thought solely upon science as we know it, certain aspects of reality and mechanisms of thought are left untapped because the mind is enslaved by scientific principle. And likewise, if one is to rely on feelings alone, other areas of thought are put aside due to enslavement by emotion.
I would go as far as to say that we are in no place to identify specifically just what created everything as we know it. On one hand, no science can prove that random processes produce what we understand to be life and structure. On the other hand, no science can prove that there is a higher being that created it all. However, one can claim that that being is simply above our border of understanding, and therefore it cannot be quantified or identified. And, one can claim that, according to the scientific principles that we know today, it is plausible that physical reality happened by chance through various processes.
In time, or out of it rather, we may come to understand how we came to be. Once unbound by time, that ever-evasive constant of quantification and understanding of our physical reality, might we know the truth.