revelation with what the rational proof entails, we must either reject reason as false or reinterpret revelation. If we reject reason—even though revelation can only be established through reason, since reason alone provides the means of establishing the Creator’s existence and recognizing prophethood—then the validity of revelation rests on something that may be unsound and false. Revelation would therefore not be conclusively established as valid. Thus, establishing the validity of revelation by rejecting reason entails undermining revelation itself. Anything whose affirmation entails its own negation is invalid; hence revelation must be reinterpreted.

Accordingly, a revealed proof yields certainty that what it signifies exists only on condition that there is no rational proof contrary to its apparent sense. Thus, a revealed proof establishes the desired conclusion only if we show that nothing in reason entails anything contrary to its apparent sense.

There are only two ways for us to establish this:

either