I'll throw in my two cents while you wait, lol.
That sounds very deterministic, which is hard to imagine with an infinite universe. When I think of a determined order of events, I think of a beginning that necessarily orders all subsequent events. Maybe that's a flaw in my thinking.
When I try to imagine a determined order in an infinite universe, the determining causes continue to reach back to nowhere, i.e. just more events. I can't tell if it's ordered or random, because I have nothing to point to and say, "*this* is why all that followed happened the way it did."
But that is the problem with modern Christians, I think. Because of some kind of learned worldview, (strangely enough involving absolute individual 'rights', I think), they find it logical, at times, that only one cause can produce any effect.
Logic, following the law of causation, not to mention acquiescing to fact of the self-contradiction of 'chance' and 'random' governing anything, demands that all things are caused, except for first cause. Call it determinism, if you like, call it fate, if you wish, but it holds true in any case. I call it predestination.
(Einstein believed in Causation right up to the end. So did Hawking, I think, though he wasn't so sure --or at least didn't know how to reconcile some discovered things with causation. I'm guessing he was so intrigued by things happening without any direction to go to discover their cause, that he allowed for 'God to roll the dice'. But to me it is a bit ludicrous to use the rule of causation (which is what science is based on) to show that causation is not the rule.)
You say, "When I think of a determined order of events, I think of a beginning that necessarily orders all subsequent events. Maybe that's a flaw in my thinking." I see no flaw there. That is straight logic.
If you are able to obtain a copy of RC Sproul's "NOT A CHANCE --God, Science and the Revolt against Reason" I think you will find his arguments compelling.