Second: Had he based his argument on motion, he would have done so as soon as the heavenly bodies rose; he would not have delayed his argument until they set.

Third: The account of Abraham provides stronger evidence for the opposite of their intended conclusion. He did not regard motion as incompatible with what he meant; rather, it was setting that was incompatible with it.

Fourth: Whatever interpretation is given to Abraham’s statement, “This is my Lord,” he did not mean that it was the Lord of all worlds. Nor did his people or anyone else believe that. Rather, someone who said this would take it as a lord to attain his own ends, as worshippers of the stars, sun, and moon do.

His people were among these worshippers. They did not deny the Maker; rather, they associated partners with Him. Hence he said to them:

“Have you considered what you have been worshipping—you and your forefathers? They are enemies to me, except the Lord of all worlds.”

And at the end of his address he said:

“Indeed, I am free of what you associate with Allah. I have turned my face towards Him who created the heavens and the earth, inclining to the truth, and I am not one of those who associate partners with Allah. His people argued with him. He said, ‘Do you argue with me about Allah when He has guided me? I do not fear what you associate with Him, unless my Lord should will something. My Lord encompasses all things in knowledge. Will you not then take heed? How should I fear what you associate with Him, while you do not fear associating with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority to you? Which of the two groups has more right to security, if you know?’”

This has been discussed at length elsewhere.