When some scientists have given an explanation for the origin of the universe due to quantum energy fluctuation in a void, was it that their sole purpose was just to show how the universe had actually originated? No, they were having one more open agenda and some scientists are still very much vocal about it: they want to send a message to all sorts of superstitious believers all over the world, so that they can forever arise from their dogmatic slumber, that this universe does not need any kind of God in any way. So I have to point out to them that the non-existence of God cannot be established in this way, because this is some sort of circular reasoning.1 But someone has pointed out that while giving an explanation for the origin of the universe scientists are in no way obliged to assume that there is a hand of God behind the creation event, because there is no evidence for the existence of any such God. So I think I have failed to make my point clear earlier and therefore this time I will have a second try.
Let us suppose that there is really a God and that this God is a non-interventionist God. That means after creating the universe it has not intervened in its creation in any way. So in such a case it is in no way possible for anybody to get any proof of its existence from the created world. Getting no proof some scientists may think here that there is no God. Still it will be a wrong conclusion. This is because as the believers cannot claim that they know with certainty there is a God, so similarly neither the scientists can claim that they know with certainty there is no God. So these scientists do not know at all whether there is any such God or not. If they claim that they do know, then we will ask: how do they come to know? What is their source of knowledge? As it is not at all possible for anybody to know beforehand whether this non-interventionist God does exist or not, so here both the possibilities should be kept open while giving an explanation for the origin of the universe: either there is a hand of God behind the creation event, or there is no such hand. Now the question is: does the method that some scientists have employed for explaining universe’s origin show in any way that this non-interventionist God does not exist? No, not at all. It can of course show that all sorts of interventionist gods do not exist, but it cannot, and does not, show that this non-interventionist God does not exist, because this method is essentially based on the assumption that this non-interventionist God does not exist and that is why this is a case of circular reasoning. However if the scientists can give an alternative explanation for the origin of the universe not by means of the usual quantum energy fluctuation in a void but by some other means, then that will settle the matter once and for all that this non-interventionist God does not exist. Whereas their failure here will show that there is some unknown force behind the creation event.
So my conclusion is this: universe’s origin from a quantum void is not evidence for the non-existence of a non-interventionist God.
Reference:
1. http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/561/579