>>God is the " first cause, itself uncaused " (primum movens immobile) and as such existent only in act (actu), that is pure actuality without potentiality and, therefore, without corporeality.<<

Here's one example. This one is easy to shred:

1. There is no such thing as a first cause in our experience so it is useless to apply to prove god's existence. By our experience, cause is an endless chain. A first cause actually violates everything we know about causality. An uncaused cause is, in fact, a contradiction. It is, by nature, acausal since it came into existence acausally. If if is acausal (and it is) then it likewise cannot cause anything to happen. No first cause.

2. The very wording presupposes god's existence. Notice no proof of god's existence is actually offered in the argument. It simply takes for granted that since god exists, god is the uncaused First Cause. A step or two was conveniently skipped over. FIRST prove god's existence, THEN tell me what god's nature is based on that proof.