Does a natural "god" maybe exist?

[Jehanne]

Well, first off, there's no such thing as the Boarde Guth Vilenkin Theorem, though a similarly named Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem is often misrepresented as stating that the universe cannot be be past eternal when in fact it does not say that.  

Second, that all things that began to exist must have a cause is an assertion which, when applied to the universe as a whole, has no evidence in support of it and may very well be wrong.

And third, there's no reason why a cause occurring at a select "moment" would have had to be a mind as arguments to the effect that it must, such as Al Ghazali's, are known to be flawed.  

In short, it's not good enough for the skeptic because its main supports turn out to be false or invalid.

Here's the paper:

Inflationary spacetimes are not past-complete

It's only 4 pages (including references); I would encourage folks to read it for themselves.

For those who do not wish to read the article, the last page is telling, and so, I will copy & paste that (emphasis mine):

What can lie beyond this boundary? Several possibil-ities have been discussed, one being that the boundary of the inflating region corresponds to the beginning of the Universe in a quantum nucleation event [12]. The boundary is then a closed spacelike hypersurface which can be determined from the appropriate instanton.  Whatever the possibilities for the boundary, it is clear that unless the averaged expansion condition can some-how be avoided for all past-directed geodesics, inflation alone is not sufficient to provide a complete description of the Universe, and some new physics is necessary in order to determine the correct conditions at the boundary [20].  This is the chief result of our paper. The result depends on just one assumption: the Hubble parameter H has a positive value when averaged over the affine parameter of a past-directed null or noncomoving timelike geodesic.