say that God is the first efficient cause also believe in matter. At the same time, more people believe in the concept of matter than what it is than believe in God. In fact, they believe in the very same types of matter while their beliefs of God as the first efficient cause remain very different. These cultures must have a reason for turning to God rather than matter as their first efficient cause. The reason is that they can give God supernatural powers that do not exist with matter. These supernatural powers differ greatly between cultures, so the main reason they turn to God is very different in similar cases. The reason that cultures turn to God instead of matter is that they can assign these supernatural powers at free will, while the concept of matter is well defined. God is just an easy approach to the unsolved mysteries and theories of the universe. In conclusion, the problem I see is that this argument could always be tested to be false by asking the question, "What Caused God?" and this is simply the basis of my argument. I need to know how God himself came into being. St. Thomas Aquinas would probably respond that God is the uncaused cause because God has always existed. To prove this argument, St. Thomas Aquinas must accompany it by another argument that proves God has existed forever. Then, God would not need to have been caused since He would have always been. This would lead to a paradox in that he could not prove God existed, until he proved God has existed forever, and he obviously cannot prove that God has existed forever until he proves that God exists at all. Cycling around those questions doesn't prove the existence of God. Because of this, I do not believe God's existence can be proved by means of St. Thomas Aquinas' second argument....
