and dependence on another for perfection. How much more so, then, when—as has been explained more than once—it is their own position that necessarily entails imperfection.

Secondly, you may be told: Grant that this is contradictory. Yet, since they combine affirming that He is above the Throne with denying that He is a body, either this affirmation and this denial are contradictory or they are not. If they are not contradictory, their position is sound, and your denial of direction is invalid. If they are contradictory, there is no more justification for holding them to the implications of one of the two contradictory propositions than for holding them to the other proposition.

For those who say that they have contradicted themselves, their position really amounts to saying: “He is above the Throne, and He is not above the Throne; He is a body, and He is not a body.” In such a case, either they are taken to hold two positions: one affirming that He is above the Throne, together with its implication that He is a body; and another denying that He is a body, together with its implication that He is not above the Throne. Or their contradictory position is reported as it stands, without holding them to the implications of denial while disregarding those of affirmation, or to the implications of affirmation while disregarding those of