It is my view that God exists, and I think that Aquinas' first two ways presents a successful argument for the existence of God. No doubt, the arguments have weak points, which are subjected to criticism but nonetheless, in my opinion, these propositions by Aquinas do indeed accomplish their purpose in establishing the existence of a Greatest Conceivable Being that is the unmoved mover and uncaused cause. I believe that this ultimate Being is unchanging and started the universe, time and all matter and concepts of existence. In my view, this Being is what we understand to be God.
St. Thomas Aquinas recognized that there were some people who doubted the existence of God because, to them, logic did not allow for or explain God's existence. His first two ways are two proofs based on logic and observation of nature in proving God's existence to those who could not accept or believe God on faith alone.
Aquinas' first way is based on motion. He calls it the most obvious way.
This first argument, the Argument from Motion, tries to prove the existence of God as the first mover, which is unmoved. Now, it is certain as a matter of sense-observation that some things in this world are in motion. Whatever is in motion, Aquinas states, is moved by something else. Aquinas then defines one type of motion as the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality, and says that nothing can make this movement except by something that is already in actuality in the same respect as the first object is in potentiality. For example, something that is actually hot, like fire, makes something that is potentially hot, like wood, to be actually hot. In this way the fire moves and alters the wood. Now, it is not...