As i see it the video seems to make the error it accuses others of making. A "vacuum" in an existing universe is not the same as "nothing" so one cannot criticise a theory by applying it to one and not the other. The something from nothing comes from basics and doesn't need already existing fluctuations, by definition it's the first fluctuation creating a new universe. Nothing seems to be unstable and inevitably creates something (I suspect everything, at least as potentials if not reality). In any case, demanding a creator first is hardly starting from "nothing" so isn't a substitute hypothesis. The suggestion that a deity as the one thing you are left with as first cause is clearly untrue as the suggestion was pulled out from nowhere. It's simply a claim, not logically arrived at. There is no must at having to accept a deity. Also stating let there be light or the word is not the same as saying infirmation existed. As for eternal life, you have it in the sense that will eternally exist now at this "time": just not at all other "times".