Universe from Nothing?

[MindForgedManacle]

How would a materialist begin, if not with nothing?
If you begin with any other concept, wouldn't you of necessity invoke a descriptive / supportive framework - such as, say, quantum physics?
But if a materialist allowed a conceptual framework at or before the start of anything, or, from "eternity" then he would need to explain the existence of this framework, which is, of itself, a conceptual entity - a supernatural thing.
Materialism, by definition, cannot allow anything supernatural.

Ooh, I'm a materialist (physicalist) and a naturalist, so perhaps I can adequately answer without straw manning as you did.

Firstly, why would a materialist begin with 'nothingness'?

Secondly, as I'm a little familiar with the philosophy of time, your assertion that a framework prior to time is conceptual is nonsense. As an adherent to the B-theory of time (a static view of time's nature), I think the universe existed in a tenseless state of at least 4 dimensions before time "began". This view has the huge benefit of having support from Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics; modern physics in general, really. And this view of time fits in well with physicalism and metaphysical naturalism, as far as I can tell.

If you think about it, the invisible laws which uphold the observable universe are far more astounding than the universe itself. The Universe is like a program that runs inside of an operating system. There is an invisible operating system which guides all observable particle behavior, directs all forces. What you see is what is running. What you don't see is the framework that makes all the behavior you can observe, possible.

Saying the universe has laws in the sense that you mean it is nonsensical. It's like thinking of biological evolution as teleological: it's backwards and anthropocentric.