In the “Suma Theologica”, by Saint Thomas Aquinas, Thomas unites the doctrines of Christianity with Aristotelian philosophy, through the affirmation that as a result of observation, of the use of the senses and of an empirical mentality, one can prove the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas holds the view that in the search for the existence of God, philosophy and theology are intertwined together and both play complementary roles. He infuses numerous theological doctrines, primarily from St. Augustine, alongside Aristotelian ideals as a prime mover, to substantiate his thesis on the existence of God. Instead of basing his argument on reason and human rationality like his predecessor, St. Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas maintains that it is instead through an empirical mentality that one is able to ascertain and understand the existence of God. Aquinas believes that all acquired knowledge originates from the experiences of our senses. He believes that by experiencing events, human beings become aware of the fact that there is an effect for every action they perform. Through this realization, Aquinas recognizes that there must be a cause that triggered that event into existence, culminating in the conclusion that everything that exists must be characterized by a cause. This argument presented defines the cosmological argument, the belief that there is a first cause, which is God, seen as the source of the cosmos who sets in motion a cycle of cause and effect. To demonstrate this argument, Thomas presents five different variations, each with subtle distinctions that show two recurring themes, the importance of sensory experience and the notion of causality, in proving the existence of God. In the first argument, Thomas lin.. .. .. middle of paper...... cause and effect stopped at the Big Bang, as does claiming that they stopped at God. The Big Bang theory, which has no prior cause, could easily have triggered the chain of cause and effect. Why must we assume that the world has a beginning and assert that the cosmos could not have caused itself? Since Aquinas did not fully understand the workings of the Universe at the time, his claim that infinite regression stopped arbitrarily before God is misleading, since the regression could have stopped while the universe itself triggered the chain of cause and effect. I fully agree that Aquinas' cosmological argument demonstrates the existence of a "cause without a cause", however I believe it fails to recognize other means of creation and does not confirm that the first cause attributes the characteristics of the God of 'Islam, Christianity and Judaism.