This is the key point
The universe does not come from nothing
The other way around
Something "must" exist
The existance is a "necessity" it is not an "option"
This is the astonishing consequence of Heinsenberg's principle

When people say there's nothing before the big bang, they either got it wrong or do not mean nothing. As Dr. Krauss points out, vacuum, alas nothing, is not nothing, it is something. It is the universe's default energy level. From this the big bang could be initiated and appears to exist from "nothing".

Whether or not God came from nothing depends on your view of God. Since God is not very well defined in the first place; many religious people will give different answers if you ask what God is; it does not qualify to be (dis)proven by empirical experiments. Any individual answer can be verified, but if the facts keep shifting from man to man you can't come with a general conclusion for God's existence anyway.

But if you ask an astronomer what the big bang is, they all should give the same answer.

So if God came from "nothing", like the big bang, it means God was created by conversion of energy to matter/structural patterns ( if that is possible at all ), but that would be disputed by many religious people, since God wasn't created!

It's not like there are no answer to think of to hypothese God's existence, it's just that religious people wont acknowledge any of them.


EDIT: what AlbertoT says.

Well ,should the modern physics theory be proved beyond any reasonable doubt then religion would not make sense anymore

It is hard to grasp the concept that
"Something must exist "
It is hard ( and not yet proved ) that such primitive form of energy can turn into ordinary matter

Assuming that it can even turn into God , it is mere fantasy

The question why something exists over nothing is a weird one, yes. What's that blob of energy doing there, in all eternity?
Especially when you reason that the only useful explanation for a blob of energy to exist is to be discovered by something else, like us. But us doesn't make sense as we are part of it.

Ah well, at least it answers the question of whether or not a falling tree makes noise when nobody is around to hear it. Apparently it does, stuff doesn't need external awareness to exist. Also verified by the universe triangle explanation of Dr. Krauss. Two parts do not need to be aware of eachother/itself (e.g. attract to a single point) when the distance is too large, and yet still exist.

Keep in mind that the depth of your perception is (from my beliefs) or maybe (from anyone else's) extremely limited. The way I see it, the cosmos can be compared to a virtual machine running inside of a real machine. You might be a process inside of that virtual machine and have no idea where you really exist relative to the other processes and parent machines above you. If we think of God as the "programmer" over this machine, then we can imagine quite simply that at one point, He spawned a virtual machine (this universe) and subsequently initiated some processes inside of that machine to act as life in the universe. (I actually like to think of people as external clients connected to the virtual machine, but that's beyond the scope of what I'm trying to say right now.)

At any rate, being God, He could have initiated this "machine" with its "hardware" set to any state he chose. Light projected from stars billions of light years away would take multiple millennium to reach Earth, but only if He let time play out like that -- and the Bible points out quite clearly that this was not the case. Being in complete control of this machine, He could certainly have "thought" the setting of the universe into existence at whatever state He chose; and being a sub-process inside of this machine, of course there's no way a simple being such as yourself could see whether this is the case or not! (what's interesting about that last statement is that, if we really have no clue where we come from, how does an idea as far-fetched as "God" really come into existence? hint: it's an implanted thought.)

So if you think about the universe as nothing more than the projection of rational thought (just like a computer), in this case that of God himself, than the idea of a universe that once was not -- and then was -- and soon will not be -- makes perfect sense.

This all still begs the question, however -- where did God himself come from? Scientifically speaking, no one knows. The Bible says that He has always existed, and I am satisfied with that. And how can you blame or scoff at me for saying such a thing -- there are multiple theories today that suggest that the physical universe was never created, but has always existed in one way or another. So how is the idea of an omnipresent God any different?

The explanation for a blob of energy to exist is the Heisemberg's uncertainty priciple ,which , by the way, is a law

The non intuitive claim
"Existance is a necessity "
is a direct consequence of this principle

The zero point energy has not been discovered
Its existance has been predicted in theory as a natural consequence of quantum physics
Should "vacuum "as synonimous with "nothing" exist then quantum physics should be refuted

I should have said reason, not explanation .

Then again, reason seems to only make sense for those who value it. A lump of matter does not.