The Cosmological and Kalam Arguments
1. What is the Kalam argument? What is cosmological argument and why is Kalam a kind of cosmological argument?
2. Why did Aquinas reject the Kalam argument? In what way does it fail to address Greek Dualism? What is the difference between showing matter is dependent on God and that matter had a beginning?
3. What is an actual infinite and a potential infinite? Why does Feser think the hotel analogy fails? In what way does this relate to theories of time and what are these theories?
4. What does it mean to say that Craig's version of the Kalam argument is too closely tied to scientific discoveries?
5. Is there another form of the cosmological argument that shows not only the dependence of matter on God but also that matter had a beginning?