"Tom, I hear what you're saying but it goes even further than that. Whether "something" is conceivable or perceivable isn't the problem. The problem would be "something" just appearing without a cause or source, *POOF*. Things like that just don't happen anywhere in any camp. Nothing can create itself from nothing"
And that's where the human limitation comes in to play. Using human language to describe what we perceive is the best we can do. But it does a poor job at describing reality.
Children do their best to experience the world and draw their conclusions. But there's more to the world than they (and we) can experience.
T.
Absolutely! Hmmmm, that sounds very familiar. :wink:
Oh wait, here it is:
How can anyone possibly consider an infinite thing from a finite plane without frying their own brain?
Everyone is saying exactly the same thing as I am just in a different way. This is exactly my point, I couldn't have planned it better. No matter what you believe, you have no choice but to believe in "something". That may be deity or science, or even both. There isn't a model that exists to where "nothing" was ever there. This holds true even with the turtles. Sure, it's turtles all the way down but that doesn't explain where they came from or how long they've been there. Either they came from "something" else or where always there. Like I said before, "something" has always been there. The fact that this basis is always present in any model is something I find intriguing.
We don't have to understand everything to see that at no point in time "nothing" ever existed. Just because I don't know the way to San Jose doesn't mean I can't tell you what's there when I get off the bus.
Everything
must come from "something", perceivable or not. Man has
no choice but to believe in "something" (isn't that a kick in the pants!) as a model doesn't/can't exist where nothing ever existed. Man
has a choice in which "something" he believes in, but "everything" clearly dictates he must believe "something" always existed (whether perceivable or not).
This concept is even deeper than the chicken/egg question. Science says the chicken evolved, religion says God made it, the turtles say the chicken is his buddy (just kidding). In either case the chicken can be explained. Science can't tell you where matter and energy came from. (It doesn't matter if you can see the source or not. If there is another source, then that becomes "something") That's the beauty of science, it dead ends at itself. We can theoretically make matter particles smaller and smaller but we can't explain where they came from. The fact a theory doesn't even exist that even holds the possibility of matter/energy coming from somewhere else is my point. Even if it did exist, "something" just moved "one turtle lower" in science.
Monotheism can't explain where God came from, plain and simple. There are various other multitheistic religions that either say this guy came from that guy (or thing) or was always here. There isn't a religion where Johnny Wishbone justs pop up out of nothing and make everything. (Eddie Murphy reference)
*POOF*! Heeeeeeer'es Johnny! :highly_amused:
Either Johnny was always here, he wasn't or came from something else. ( This is NOT meant to symbolize ANYONE'S deity in any religion, it's just a fictitious example and is NOT meant to be disrespectful to ANYONE! I can't be more clear on that!)
No "matter" how small of a particle or big of a God you choose, "something" has always been there.
Even if you created a Johnny Wishbone belief system ( I think I inadvertently just did), you can't explain where Johnny came from.
Where's the spaghetti monster come from, Italy?
Hey Guest!
but were afraid to ask: 
STOP!! Never post your email address in open forums. Bots can "harvest" your email! If you must share your email use a Private Message or use the 
smilie in place of the real @
Pretty Please - add it to our Events forum(s) and add to the calendar! >> 
