be pointed to, it follows that no substance can be pointed to or occupy space.”

If you say this, you will be told: “Affirming a substance that cannot be pointed to is the position of the philosophizers who affirm substances that cannot be pointed to, and of the Christians who deny His being above creation.”

They will then say: “We do not concede that every substance must be capable of being pointed to. You yourself have acknowledged this in your discussion with the philosophers.” Although this view is false, the point is to demonstrate the weakness of the arguments of these deniers, whose denial entails denying the divine attributes.

You will also be told: “Affirming a substance that cannot be pointed to is like affirming a self-subsisting being that cannot be pointed to.”

If he says, “I mentioned this to deny that He is a substance like other substances,” the reply is:

“One who holds this view says: ‘He is a substance like the substances whose existence is claimed by those who affirm immaterial intelligible substances; thus, He is a substance like those immaterial intelligible substances.’ Whoever denies these substances refutes their claim; otherwise, he does not.”