impossible II,

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Why do you need a cause for something that has always existed? You said nothing never exists, so therefore something must always have existed and needs no cause.

The "something" that exists is what you see. It had a cause.

Originally posted by josephw
The "something" that exists is what you see. It had a cause.

Something has always existed, because nothing cannot exist. That which has always existed is not caused.