valley between.

Let me introduce a few of these contradictions or inconceivabilities.
Before you can reach your mouth with your hand, you must go over half
the distance, then half of the rest, then half of the rest, and so on
_ad infinitum._ But you cannot make the infinite number of divisions,
and therefore you cannot reach your lips. Again, you cannot conceive
of extension of space or time without a limit, nor can you conceive
of a limit to space or time. Here conceivability contradicts itself.
Furthermore, you cannot conceive of existence without a cause, nor of
a cause without existence. To the statement of the believer that, "as
the wonderful mechanism of the watch presumes a designer, so the
infinitely more wonderful mechanism of the universe presumes God, the
infinite designer," Ingersoll replied that this is simply to jump
over the difficulty by an infinite assumption. Ingersoll, on the
other hand, claimed that the material universe has always existed;
apparently unaware that he thus was guilty of the same fallacy of
which he accused others, by _assuming_ infinite existence without a
cause. The difference is that the believer's assumption gives us a
personal God, a kind, loving heavenly Father who provides for the
eternal bliss and welfare of his children, while Ingersoll's
assumption gives death and darkness and despair.

An object thrown from one point to another is always at some point,
therefore it has no time to move from one point to another. And yet
we know that it does move, even though we cannot conceive how it can
do so. Again, suppose that the hour-hand of your clock is at eleven
and the minute-hand at twelve. Now, you cannot conceive how the
minute-hand can overtake the hour-hand, although you know by
observation that it does overtake it. For by the time the minute-hand