inasmuch as they affirm two positive attributes for the necessarily existent being. This is a broad subject that would require lengthy discussion.

It is thus clear that their forms of reasoning can be dispensed with. They may alert some people to what they had overlooked, but those people could also become aware of it without them. Moreover, they do not yield the necessary knowledge attained through the innate disposition, through the signs, or through a fortiori reasoning, let alone the knowledge subsequently attained through the revealed law. They do, however, yield a kind of limited knowledge and dispel the corresponding denial, ignorance, and disbelief. They thus establish some measure of acknowledgment of the Maker and prevent some measure of denial of Him.

But they do not yield what is conveyed by the signs that are seen and heard, including the illustrative comparisons founded upon a fortiori reasoning.

They have reported that the leading ancient philosophers said: “In metaphysics there is no path to certainty; we speak only of what is more fitting, more appropriate, and more suitable.” They interpreted this as meaning that nothing is possible in this field beyond conjecture