The First Cause Argument is one of the oldest and most widely known arguments for the existence of God (Welch, 2005). This argument uses the simple idea of causation to try and prove the existence of God and while it has existed for about 2000 years in some form or another, Christians adapted it through Saint Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century (Welch, 2005). However, there are many possible objections to the First Cause Argument and these will be examined in order to prove whether the First Cause Argument successfully shows that God exists. Before one can begin to debate the First Cause Argument there is a fundamental question that must be examined that the argument hopes to address, which would be something along the lines of ‘How did the universe come to be?’ Due to major breakthroughs in science today, we are able to trace history back to a single moment, the so-called Big Bang (Ellis, 2002). Discoveries in astronomy and physics show us that there was definitely a beginning to our universe and according to the “Standard Theory”, time and space did not exist and our universe began around 13.7 billion years ago (Ellis, 2002). All matter in the universe was condensed into a single point called the Singularity Particle (Ellis, 2002). However, I am not trying to argue the Big Bang Theory but what must be examined is where the matter that was contained in the Singularity Particle came from. In Aquinas’ book, Summa Theologica, he wrote “If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, seeing that subsequent movers move only in as much as they are put in motion by the first mover, as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other, and this everyone understands to be God” (Aquinas, 1917: 22). which can be initially phrased as follows: 1. Everything that exists has a cause, 2. The universe exists, 3. Therefore the universe has a cause, 4. That cause is God (Chapman, 2014: Slide 6). This argument, however, is open to the following counter argument: 1. Everything that exists has a cause, 2. God exists, 3. Therefore, God has a cause, 4. That cause is another God? (Chapman, 2014: Slide 5). This puts the theist in a bad position because if God himself/herself has a cause then there is a potentially infinite chain of Gods causing Gods, called an Infinite Regress: an infinite line of questioning that can never be resolved (Kreeft, 2010). One cannot say for certain whether God would have a cause or not, and if a God does have a cause one does not know who created it. However, the First Cause Argument is not trying to prove that there are infinitely many Gods causing Gods (assuming that’s even possible) the First Cause Argument is trying to prove that there is one God. Therefore, in order to avoid the problem of God having a cause, the argument is usually rephrased in the following way: 1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause, 2. The universe began to exist, 3. Therefore, the universe had a cause, 4. That cause is God (Chapman, 2014: Slide 6). This form of the argument is not open to the same objection as before, that God