the divine attributes.” This became one of their arguments against them. They coupled it with the theologians’ sometimes unqualified assertion that textual proofs do not yield certainty, saying to him: “You too maintain that the apparent meanings of texts do not yield certainty. The ambiguous verses in the Quran indicating divine will and predestination are neither fewer nor weaker as evidence than the verses indicating bodily resurrection. Yet you permit figurative interpretation of those verses, so why do you not also permit such interpretation of the verses concerning this matter?”

He replied: “We have not relied on any particular verse or any particular hadith. Rather, we know as a matter of necessity that the prophets, from first to last, unanimously affirmed bodily resurrection. No one has said that likening Allah to creation and predestination are necessarily known to be part of their religion. Thus the distinction is clear.”

Let the discerning reader consider this answer. These speculative theologians told them: “We know as a matter of necessity that the messengers proclaimed the resurrection of bodies.” They did not ground their knowledge of this in the evidence of the Quran and hadith and the consensus affirming it, because their opponents had countered them with comparable—and indeed stronger—evidence concerning the divine attributes and predestination. They therefore resorted to their assertion: “We know as a matter of necessity that they proclaimed bodily resurrection.” For what they said