If the universe came from nothing, then nothing needs to exist in order for the universe to come from there. But the definition of nothing is non-existence. Thus the existing universe coming from non-existence is what Evolutionists need to explain. If they cannot explain it, then they rationally cannot discredit the idea of a God or creator. For the Universe to exist, quite simply there had to be something in existence for it to come from.
Only an eternal God/Life/Consciousness is the feasible answer. If it was not eternal then the universe came from nothing, if it was not living, then the universe would not contain life. It is logical to assume that the source of the Big Bang has the raw attributes of the product and if the universe is a product of a Big Bang, then the source of the Big Bang had to have all the ingredients that the universe currently displays, otherwise these attributes came out of nothing. This is one of the major flaws of Atheism. They do not even tackle such questions. It is foreign to them, yet is one of the most basic questions that they need to ask.
The only reason that any intellectual or non-intellectual is an Atheist is because they have ignored how the universe could have come from nothing. It should be one of the fundamental questions about the Universe and how life came to be. Many who believe in God have thought about this. It is one of the logical reasons for believing in a God of some kind. Is it any wonder then that Atheists need to ignore such questions and ideas to retain their belief that there is no eternal God and that the universe can come from nothing. I call it willing ignorance. It suits them to not have to think about how a universe or multiverse can pop out of nothing.