Creationism

[GrandizerII]

Firstoff: could the first cause aka "existence" be a pink unicorn? If so, what is not serious about my question? Why object to my wordplay after Aquinas wordplay? Because it sound less intellectual? If you dont like my description of "existence" as a "pink unicorn", please provide your own, more to the point description or definition of "existence".

If by "pink unicorn" you have in mind that which we imagine to be a "pink unicorn" then that can't be semantically equivalent to "first cause" as is traditionally understood.

For your last sentence, I don't know how to answer that other than what was already said. Maybe your point is that this can't but be abstract, but for Aquinas, "Existence" is "something" and not a mere abstract notion.

Whatever, "existence is the first cause", in a nutshell, correct? Existence causes everything else, not in a temporal matter, but in a logical matter, correct*?

For Aquinas, yes, basically.

WLC: Please, lets not waste our time with that dishonest clown.

Oh well, doesn't bother me.

Please. regarding that "eternal" part of Plantinga: "eternal" or "eternity" is a temporal concept right?

I suppose so, since eternity is defined in terms of "time", whether its definition is "infinite time" or "beyond time".

Fair enough on your footnote.