but only to draw attention to the unsoundness of the arguments by which they oppose the followers of the revealed religions on this and similar matters, and to show that they speak from either simple or compound ignorance.

The response is as follows:

If what is meant is that Allah deserves to be called a true King because this meaning applies to Him, then there is no doubt that He has called Himself a true King. Nor is there any doubt that this name encompasses these meanings, together with many more affirmative attributes of perfection and His freedom from deficiencies. Yet this contains something indicating that He has neither will nor purpose—unless one argues that the term “self-sufficient” excludes this, or that this would entail dependence upon another. This has already been discussed. It has been shown that, although this involves no dependence upon anything other than Him, what they maintain entails consequences more objectionable, in several respects, than those they sought to avoid. Indeed, denying Him this is precisely what would entail His being dependent—indeed, nonexistent, and even intrinsically impossible—as has been established elsewhere.