[Sabertooth]

...it isn't appropriate to extrapolate from everything in the universe having a cause to the universe (and this is what you mean by nature, no?) having a cause. Isn't it even a category error since causation is law-like correlation in time and, supposing the universe to include time itself, cannot apply to time itself.

I disagree, but not scientifically. Nor can you hold that position scientifically.

One can't speculate on what might be beyond the space-time continuum on the basis of anything scientific, since science only deals with what is inside of it. To do so goes beyond the bounds of agnosticism.

The Bible, for example, speaks of a time-like concept called "Eternity," that is distinct from time. But Eternity neither be ruled in or out, scientifically.

[edsheppa]

Nor can you hold that position scientifically.

I hold it logically. From everything in the universe being caused it doesn't follow that the universe is caused. It is the same kind of error as saying that every integer has a predecessor (or whatever property) therefore the integers have a predecessor.

I also hold it definitionally. Causation happens in time, not out of it.

One can't speculate on what might be beyond the space-time continuum on the basis of anything scientific,...

I'll reserve judgement on that one. Assuming you mean the 4-dimensional spacetime of our ordinary experience (OK, not so ordinary), there are quite a few speculations of a scientific nature that go far beyond it.

But listen to us talking about space-time. That revolution happened barely a century ago. The scope of science is relentlessly increasing isn't it? Perhaps Eternity or something like it or totally different from it but unimaginable now will come within its purview not too long from now.