Greetings, Craig --
[Ham, previously]:
An uncreated absolute source has no beginning or ending by definition.
[Craig]:
Two fallacies above:
1) If something is created then by definition it has a
beginning. But it doesn't follow that whatever is uncreated
has no beginning.
2) If something is uncreated, it does not follow that its
existence cannot end.
The adjective "uncreated" has no empirical reference, which makes any
definition speculative. Therefore, while you're correct in asserting that
"it doesn't follow that whatever is uncreated has no beginning," it also
doesn't follow that what is uncreated HAS a beginning OR an end. In fact,
the concept of God or Supreme Being in religious literature is characterized
as "eternal" (i.e., without beginning or end)..
Moreover, the word "absolute" implies "free from imprfection", "having no
restriction, exception, or qualification", "self-sufficient and free of
external references or relationships" (Websters New Collegiate Dictionary).
The terms used in mystical literature to describe the Uncreated God are:
Tao, Nirvana, Brahman, AIN SOF, Void, Nothingness, Pristine Awareness and
Absolute Trancendence.
Buddha spoke of this "profound truth":
"There is, O monks, an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed. Were
there not, O monks, this unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed, there
would be no escape from the world of the born, originated, created, formed."
Good try, Craig. But, again, absolute truth is inaccessible to the finite
mind, so the fundamentals of metaphysics must be left to intuitive
reasoning.
Thanks for the logical analysis.
Essentiallty yours,
Ham
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
