Who throws the dice for you?

[Heywood]

Premise 4 is a conditional...there is no question begging. It does not conclude that a supernatural element does indeed exist. A condition has to be met to make that conclusion.
Premise 5 follows from premise 1 and 2. If you accept 1 and 2, you just have to accept 5...I see no way around it.

I would say the likelihood of our reality being dependent on a supernatural element is a little less than 50%.

I don't have to accept 5. The alternative that I proposed is that there is a scientific explanation that we have yet to discover. As an illustration: God did not make the solar system work until Newton had an opportunity to ponder skydiving fruit.

The existence of such a scientific explanation would make either premise 1 or 2 or both false. If you accept 1 and 2 as true it precludes you from saying there is scientific explanation that we have yet to discover.

The conclusion of God invokes the supernatural and in your argument God is only true if the supernatural is assumed. This is begging the question

The conclusion of the argument is that our reality depends on a supernatural element. I see your point though. Premise 4 does not stand on its own. Let me think about this for a bit because I think this criticism can be overcome.