After reading all of the "new atheist" books, I am surprised that their simply are not any argument concerning the incomprehensibility of god. In fact, I have never seen any sort of argument from incomprehensibility, or problem of incomprehensibility of a god. Science is the study of reality, while religion is the study of what supposedly "transcends" reality. Since god is outside of reality, he "transcends reality", and exists outside of time and space. Being the creator of the universe, god must have always existed in order to not be subject to infinite regress. Those are the traits of a non-religious god, but with a religious god the deity also has traits which often resemble humans. The first objection that I will make to god is understanding the actual being who created the universe without even understanding his creation. Scientists do not know exactly how subatomic particles function, and we are yet to know the true nature of the universe. Before studying the creator, we should first study the creation. Secondly, different religions have conflicting gods. These gods contradict each other, so either one of these religions is true or non of them are true. Accepting that one is true, how will be possibly determine which one is true? People rarely convert to a separate religion then they were indoctrinated in as a child. Thirdly, since a god exists outside of space and time how do we connect with this deity? If a god actually does exist outside of space and time, then how can we possibly interact with something that does not even exist in reality. People may supposedly have "experiences", but each of these experiences tend to correlate to their own religion. Priests report that they talk to a god, yet how likely is it that a Christian priest speaks to Allah or the Jewish god? The only way we can learn about god is by interaction, but how does an entity outside of the universe interact with people very much in the universe? So god must broadcast a radio wave from outside the universe to inside somebody's brain, but it is evident this god is not actually doing this since their are many religions that percieve god in different ways. Fourthly, gods have always had human characteristics and traits that are incompatible. The christian god punishes people for eternity for simply being brought up in a rival belief system, while also supposedly being all-loving. The believer could say that their god does not do this, yet that is not believing in the innerancy of their holy text, which should be innerant as a god supposedly inspired this text. And if the person denies that the god inspired the text, then what credence does this text hold in the first place? And finally, god must be more complex then his creation. This is the boeing 747 argument, but even if god does exist how are we supposed to comprehend this wild complexity? One of the most commons subjections to the beoing 747 argument is that god is "simple" since he is merely spirit. Furthermore, believers point out that we control our brains which are extremely complex. Yet we did not create our brain, nature did. Yet god created the universe himself. Even though god could exist and be extremely complex, how do we understand a god which is so complex? How do we know what a being feels and experiences which has no experiences? Each religion has their own story and presupposes that they are the only true path. Although belief in a god does not bother me, believing that you know god, his traits, and how this deity wants you to act is surely based on complete speculation. In a world where people base many of their core moral and ethical beliefs on god, they should rethink how much they truly "know" this god.