“The first premise of this argument is based on the philosophers’ conception of divine unity, namely, the denial of composition: every composite depends on its parts, and its parts are other than itself. This is exceedingly weak, as has been explained at length elsewhere.

The second premise is based on the claim that the reason for dependence is coming into being, not contingency.”

[Ibn Taymiyyah’s Commentary]

I say:

If what is meant by this is, for example, that coming into being is evidence that whatever comes into being requires an originator, or that coming into being is a condition for an effect’s dependence on an agent,