I believe that you have it backwards. A Universal Turing Machine is the equivalent of any computer running any programming language, but not all computers or all programming languages are the equivalent of a Universal Turing Machine. In fact, no computer ever built is the equivalent of a Turing Machine - they all lack the infinite amount of memory that the Universal Turing Mmachine has.
Look up 'Turing'.
Universal Turing Machine, Alternating Turing Machine, Oracle Turing Machine, Probabilistic Turing Machine, or Deterministic Turing Machine, or Nondeterministic Turing Machine? Please note that a Universal Turing Machine is, by definition, capable of simulating any other Turing Machine by encoding it. This includes Probabilistic/Nondeterministic Turing Machines.
Getting back to real-world programming languages, why do you assume that there exists no hardware that provides true random numbers derived from atomic decay events to the programming language? Pict, Prolog, Promela, PGC and GOL are all nondeterministic. In addition, an unpredictable but deterministic programming language is just as interesting as a nondeterministic programming language.
Interesting gleanings from searching on the above:
"GOL is a nondeterministic programming language obtained by extending LISP to encompass a modal predicate calculus"
"...an unboundedly nondeterministic programming language, the Partial Guarded Command language -- which includes partial commands, nondeterministic choice, 'random assignment' and recursion ... No restriction is placed on possible nondeterminism, which may be bounded, countable or uncountable ... The following logics are derived: Dijkstra's calculus of predicate transformers, Hoare logics for partial and total correctness, a novel logic of invariant relations, and a temporal logic."