Mathiscool, if god was a process or force such as electricity, energy, or "life force", then it couldn't make plans, have desires for what humans do, or help anyone find their keys. Aquinas himself lists existence as something god is free from, so by your own quote, he agrees with Dawkins- god cannot exist. If he was some sort of "life force" that early humans worshipped before they understood these processes, then his simplicity would necessarily undermine the entire bible, on which the faith rests. If the bible is not relevant to the way christians believe, why are there churches at all?
The truth is, there are as many definitions of god as there are believers, and even individual people's view of god change with every post they make. So how is any one book supposed to refute every single individuals' ever-morphing concept of a single entity that even believers can't agree in any detail of its existence? Hahahahaha, define god, or admit it's a lie. If you can't define god, you can't claim it exists. Existence refers to the real world, not your imagination. Stupid argument.