another and the other is dependent on another, that the one is subject to another’s power and the other is subject to another’s power, that the one is susceptible to afflictions and defects such as separation, division, and partition and the other is susceptible to afflictions and defects such as separation, division, and partition, that the one can be corrupted and transformed and the other can be corrupted and transformed, and other such matters from which the Lord must be held wholly free—then, despite their sharing these matters from which the Lord must be held wholly free, it is not valid to draw an analogy between them or to apply to one the ruling established for the other, even though they share these matters.

The Creator, glorified be He, differs from everything else far more profoundly than Christ differs from their gods. He therefore has an even greater right not to be likened to His creation merely because He shares certain names and attributes with them. The underlying premise of this unsound analogy is that, if two things share certain features and resemble one another in some respects, they must also share and resemble one another in other respects that do not necessarily follow from what they have in common. All of this is a grave error, though some forms of it are graver than others. If two things share a feature, they must also share whatever necessarily follows from it, since the presence of that which entails something necessitates the presence of what it entails. As for what does not necessarily follow from it, they need not share that.

Thus, being fuel for Hell is not a necessary consequence of being an object of worship. Rather, it is a necessary consequence of being an object of worship fit to enter the Fire. Christ and those like him are not fit to enter the Fire.

Likewise, existence, life, knowledge, power, being established, descent, and similar attributes ascribed to both the Creator and created beings do not necessarily entail