And if by “body” you mean that He resembles any created thing, we do not concede that this follows.

Whichever of these answers you give the atheists, someone who affirms that He is distinct from the world and above it will answer you just as you answered those atheists. He will say:

“What do you mean by saying, ‘If He were above the world and distinct from it, He would be a body’? If you mean a body in the ordinary sense, we do not concede that this follows.

“If you mean that He is susceptible to separation and partition, the same answer applies.

“If you mean that He is composed of indivisible substances, or of matter and form, we likewise do not concede that this follows.

“If you mean that He would resemble any created thing, we do not concede that this follows.”

If you mean that He can be physically pointed to, or that something of Him can be seen while something else is not, he does not concede that this consequence is excluded.

[The Fourth Argument]

It may be said:

One judges that an object of knowledge either exists or does not exist; that an existent either subsists in itself or subsists in another, is either necessary or contingent, either eternal or originated, either precedes another or is simultaneous with it, and is either distinct from another or present in the same locus as it.

One also judges that a self-subsisting being, or a being capable of possessing attributes of perfection, is either living or dead, either knowledgeable or ignorant, and either able or incapable; that whatever cannot possess these attributes is more deficient than what can; and that whatever possesses attributes of perfection is more perfect than what possesses attributes of deficiency, and than what is incapable of possessing either.

These truths and others like them are firmly established in human reason. They are either self-evident truths,