It may then be said: That substances are alike in nature is not known with certainty. If the proof of temporal origination rests on their being alike, it rests on a premise that is either false or unproven.

Sixth point: Regarding his statement, “It is not rationally implausible that there should exist substances necessarily confined to their own spatial regions,” the reply is: Spatial regions, which are notional determinations of place, are not existent entities. Since they are not existent entities, no particular region can possess a distinguishing feature that would require a substance to occupy it exclusively. Thus, knowing that substances need not occupy particular spatial regions does not depend on their being alike in nature; this can be known without knowing that they are alike. Likewise, many speculative theologians have affirmed that substances can move or remain at rest, combine or separate, without basing this on their being alike in nature. Moreover, the substances observed in the heavens and the earth are seen to move through spatial regions. These suffice to establish knowledge of the Maker for anyone who follows this path. Other paths may also be followed here, but this is not the place to discuss them.

Seventh point: His statement, “In that case, the proof does not universally establish the temporal origination of