Some philosophers have sought to answer the implications he pressed upon them concerning relations by saying: “Relations can exist only in this way, so perfection in Him cannot be conceived before they exist. Moreover, since they depend on something else, perfection is not established in them, but in that on which they depend.”

I say: Someone may reply that this is precisely what those who affirm the attributes say, for the discussion concerns only events connected with His will and power.

It is well known that all events cannot have existed from eternity. Thus, if someone says, “Relations exist only as things that come into being,” he may be answered: “Likewise, events dependent on His will and power exist only as things that come into being.”

As for his statement, “A relation depends on something else, so perfection is not established in it,” there are two answers.

First, the argument does not distinguish between what is dependent and that on which it depends. If the distinction is valid, the argument fails; if it is not valid, the argument is refuted. Thus, it is invalid on either assumption.

Second, one may say: “Likewise, whatever is connected with His will and power is also dependent, so perfection is not established in it.”

This is clarified by the fact that He—glory be to Him—is eternally worthy of the attributes of perfection: no eternal perfection can exist without His being characterized by it from eternity,