They are told in reply:

This rests on two premises: that whatever can receive something cannot be devoid of both it and its opposite, and that a perpetual succession of temporally originated events is impossible. The invalidity of both premises has already been demonstrated above.

Yet even before recognizing the invalidity of this reasoning, sound reason makes it clear that the rational proofs presented to establish these acts, which accord with the scriptural proofs, are more evident, manifest, and unequivocal to reason than the claim that a perpetual succession of temporally originated events is impossible. This premise is exceedingly obscure and doubtful; most rational thinkers from all nations dispute and reject it. It is the foundation of the speculative theology condemned by the early generations and the leading scholars. Through this premise, the Dahriyya gained the upper hand over those speculative theologians of the religious communities who invoked it, exposing their inability to establish that Allah Most High brings anything into being—whether the world or anything else.

Those among the Jahmiyya, the Muʿtazila, and their followers who believed this premise to be sound thought that the world’s coming into being and the existence of the Creator could be established only through it. In reality, however, it is incompatible with the world’s coming into being and with establishing the existence of the Creator. Indeed, one cannot affirm that Allah Most High brings any temporally originated event into being except by affirming the opposite of this premise. Nor can one establish that Allah created what He created, or affirm the truthfulness of His messengers in what they reported about Him, except by affirming its opposite. Thus, what they made a foundation and a proof of the soundness of reason and revelation is itself incompatible with, and contradictory to, both revelation and reason, as has been explained at length elsewhere.