[Qdeathstar]

The biggest problem with Travelers argument is:

1. He has a redundant argument which he believes proves something.

He uses newtons laws (of equal and opposite reaction) then he uses what he claimes to be universaly except "cause and effect"


Cause and effect and equal and opposite reaction are very simular points, the point being something causes something else.

None of those arguments prove that a god is the cause, and even if this argument could be beleived, it doesnt explain how god could not only be cause, but (as the assumption of this argument goes) the effect of some unkown. What cause effected God into existance? Or did he always exist, if he always existed, then newtons laws and cause and effect relationships are obviously based on incorrect assumptions. If they are based on incorrect assumptions, they are incorrect. Which would mean choosing them to support the beleive in a god would be rediculous.

Secondly, just becuase something has to "cause" an "effect" (under the assumptions travler has laid out) that doesnt mean that God has to be the cause.