Creationism

[Belacqua]

Can we safely say that Saint Thomas Aquinas was one such individual who argued precisely that or are you going to suggest that the Summa Theologica was arguing for deism?

Thomas Aquinas believed in the God of the Bible. He was clear that the first cause argument could not prove that. 

The first cause argument only proves that there is a first cause.

He did not believe in deism.

As much as I love the redefinition game it should be noted that Thomas Aquinas argued for both a temporal sequence and logical primacy. As for Aristotle, the phrase "unmoved mover" pretty much shrieks of a temporal sequence.

This is not a "redefinition." The word he was using came first. 

Thomas specifically rejected the Kalam-style first cause as a moment in a temporal sequence.

As Grandizer has pointed out, Aristotle believed the universe was eternal, with no beginning. Thomas said that a beginning could not be proved by logical argument. His first cause doesn't address that.

Unlike so many people, he was very clear on what logic could prove (natural theology) and what it couldn't. He thought that some parts of Christianity can be shown with logic, and some can't.

The first cause part can be argued for with logic. Not the Trinity or Jesus-as-savior part.

Typing out what the Argument From First Cause "actually" says would be a damned sight easier if there weren't dozens of different ones to pick from. 

That's why I was very clear which one I was talking about. 

Little matter since they all founder on our complete ignorance regarding plucking a universe from nothing. From that fatal flaw they either degenerate into unsupported argumentation or complete non sequitur.

The argument I described says nothing about "plucking a universe from nothing." It doesn't address any temporal beginning, or anything "before" there was something. 

If you think that there is something in science which proves that something can exist without there being any existence, please let us know. Such a proof would falsify Thomas's argument. 

If you can point me to any reliable links or sources which contradict what I've said here I'll be happy to look at them.