I'm a theist (of a rather popular sort that I won't get into because I do NOT want to argue the merits of my belief---no one will win). Arguments about God and its existence are always pointless because God as most of us theists believe in it is omnipotent. And when you have an omnipotent God, the rules of logical argument break down. So, yes, when I consider how the Universe formed, I conclude that it cannot have created itself, that something must have brought it into being. I choose to call that thing God and to ascribe to it other qualities in line with my beliefs.
Yes, now, you say, I must deal with how God was created. No, I don't, because God as I believe in it is omnipotent; an omnipotent thing can do anything it wants, including create itself. Science isn't paradox-free, either. [1]
Besides, what of scientists who are also atheists? They say the universe was formed out of a larger multiverse. How was the multiverse formed? Infinite regression (I like that term) comes into play HERE, not when an omnipotent God exists (or is assumed to exist). I strongly doubt that it is possible to prove the existence of God to anyone aside from oneself, just as I strongly doubt that it is possible to prove God's nonexistence to anyone but oneself.
[1] I'm not saying this as a knock against science. I'm a student, not in a scientific field, but I very much enjoy and respect science and most scientists. I don't feel science needs to exist without a God. I do, however, agree that one cannot resort to "God did it" within the scientific method. (I just think the scientific method cannot answer everything.)