Kalam

[Jehanne]

I haven't been interested in debate much these days with theists, but if I ever did want to argue with a Thomist, I'd challenge them instead on something else related to their theology, namely how they could reconcile a triune God of distinct Persons with the absolutely simple/indivisible First Cause, in addition to other Christian beliefs held by Thomists borne out of revelation instead of logic. I think this is where the many weaknesses of their worldview lie.

Yes, this is an important point, I think.

Any Christian who's being careful in his thinking will make a clear distinction between Natural Theology -- that which (they say) can be proved by logical extrapolation from the facts of the world, and Revealed Theology -- that which they just have to accept as given, with no possible logical proof. 

First Cause arguments only get you to the God of the Philosophers, which is, as you say, absolutely simple. How this absolutely simple impassible non-physical thing could undergo kenosis and incarnate as a single individual is not something that can be explained. Which of course is one reason that Jews, non-Christian Neoplatonists, and others, don't accept it. 

I suspect that any discussion with a Thomist about Revealed Theology would be limited to what exactly they mean by things like "kenosis," but if they're careful they won't mix up what's provable (allegedly) with what's not.

Alternative, naturalistic explanations (compelling ones, in my opinion) exist to the above, namely, natural and/or revealed theology.