the philosophers and others could have their views refuted only by this method. They were mistaken on both counts.

As for the eternalist philosophers, this method only emboldened them and furnished them with an argument that these theologians could rebut only through obstinate denial, which merely strengthens and further emboldens an opponent. They said to them:

“How can a temporally originated event occur without a newly arising cause? How can the essence remain unchanged in its state, its action, and everything attributed to it, from eternity past to eternity future, while the world proceeds from it at one time rather than another, without any act subsisting in it or any cause arising?”

Thus, what they made a foundation of religion and a prerequisite for knowing Allah Most High was incompatible with religion and prevented full knowledge of Allah. The rational arguments they advanced actually provided stronger evidence for the opposite of what they sought to establish: temporally originated events cannot occur without a condition that they had deemed an obstacle to temporal origination.

As for matters pertaining to Islam, this principle compelled them to deny Allah Most High’s attributes lest their argument be invalidated. Those who did not deny the attributes denied the acts that subsist in Him and other matters connected with His will and power.

Their failure to believe in some of what the Messenger brought, and their denial of some of the names and attributes that rightly belong to Allah Most High, thus led them into contradictions and doubts evident to people of understanding.

Thus they did not give faith in Allah and His Messenger its due,