eternity past. They did not shy away from allowing temporally originated events to subsist in Him, yet avoided affirming any new description of Him in how they referred to or spoke of Him.”

He said:

“The proof that their claim is false is this: if He could receive temporally originated events, He would never be free of them, as previously established concerning substances, which we judged could not possibly be devoid of accidents. If He were never free of temporally originated events, He would not precede them. This leads to the conclusion that the Maker Himself is temporally originated.”

He said:

“This proof is not consistent with the Muʿtazila’s principles, since they allow a substance to be devoid of accidents, subject to distinctions we have already indicated. They also affirm newly arising characterizations of the essence of the Lord, exalted is He, resulting from a temporally originated will which, as they claim, subsists without a substrate.

“The following consideration also prevents them from consistently applying a proof in this matter: if new characterizations of the essence may arise without indicating temporal origination, it would not be implausible for the same to hold when accidents themselves successively affect the essence.”