Examine either (a) the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Discussion Instructions:

1. Respond to EACH of the three Module 2 discussion questions presented below (questions A, B & C). Do so using separate posts for each question; do NOT respond to multiple questions within the same single post.
2. Continue to participate by submitting additional followup posts in response to each question. Before the module ends, be sure to provide at least TWO substantive responses to EACH of the following discussion questions:

Question A: Examine either (a) the Kalam Cosmological Argument and/or (b) the Anthropic Teleological Argument, as discussed in the text. Is either more plausible than the other? Why or why not?

Question B: What are “properly basic” beliefs? Can a belief in God be one, if the whole notion of a “properly basic” belief is justified?

Question C: Which of the following accounts of God do you find most plausible: (1) God as personal, as understood by traditional Western theism; (2) God as an impersonal force, as understood by Spinoza and Shankara; or (3) God as understood by process theology, as a quasi-personal God but not the creator of the world ex nihilo or “out of nothing”; or (4) none of the above? Why?