Well you gave me AN answer on the "from eternity" point which made the argument nonsensical. And moreover it is one that is contradicted by the website you refer to (and the answer that gives is pretty confused, too).
However you misrepresent my argument, because as well as commenting on the "from eternity" point I also raised an important issue which you never addressed. The relationshp between the concept of beginning and a finite past. Even though I referred back to it in my last two posts you are now pretending that I did not say it. Let me put it simply - you cannot define MY strategy by the points YOU choose to address.
And since you chose to leave a point which calls the idea that the universe had a beginning into question, you can't turn around and claim that you have successfully defended the argumen even so far as showing that our universe had a cause.
Your version of the kalam argument is to set up a logical contradiction and then invoke God to get out of it, rather than looking at more plausible alternatives.