If they compare the celestial sphere’s existence alongside the Lord to sound accompanying motion or light accompanying the sun, this and similar comparisons are invalid. They do not establish even the possibility that their claim is true, let alone prove its truth.

For in these and similar cases, either the second is said to be contiguous with the first, as with the parts of time and motion, rather than simultaneous with it; or the second is said to depend on the first as a condition, not that the first originates and produces the second. Thus, they cannot cite any instance whatsoever of something producing another while the two coincide in time.

We have set out these alternatives so that the response does not rest on subtle matters understood only by certain people. The clearer a response is, and the greater the agreement among rational people concerning it, the more deserving it is of mention than others, since the purpose is to clarify the truth and refute falsehood. Otherwise, this could be discussed at length, and one could argue that a cause must precede its effect in time, and that the conjunction fāʾ used here indicates succession.

When someone says, “My hand moved, so my sleeve moved,” this indicates that the second event followed the first. One may say that the causal fāʾ implies succession, but the converse does not hold: every effect comes after its cause, yet not everything that comes after