The idea of a god not being needed for the existence of the universe has been around for a long time. I heard of the argument for the first time in Philosophy 101 several decades ago. If a god created the universe, then who created this god? And who created the being that created this god? This is the “Infinite Regression” argument.
One may argue that god is a spontaneous being that needs no creator, but one can say the same for the universe.
To me, the idea of the universe itself being an entity that comes into existence all by itself is just as palatable as it having been created by another being which comes into being all by itself! In fact, it is neater as you eliminated the need for a middleman. The idea of the omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient being, conjured up by our ancestors and cast into our own image, was from a time when people had a very limited knowledge and very little understanding of nature and the universe. Now that we know how vast the universe is, we should fully re-evaluate and reformulate our religious ideas.
Humanism and the Humanists.
For humanists, the universe exists naturally and for itself rather than as an extension of any supernatural beings like gods, and it does not require the existence of beings like gods to explain its existence. Even religious humanists typically describe the universe as “self-existing and not created.”
In closing, let me leave you with this thought. The common thread among religions is their god is the one true god, so what if there is indeed a god but we have not recognized him yet? Does that mean the millions upon millions of faithfuls have sacrificed for naught, and the millions who died in vain in religious conflicts have died for non-exiting deities or false prophets?