First, these words, together with the argument offered in their support, are closer to the speech of ignorant, misguided people who do not know what they are saying than to that of people of reason, knowledge, and clear expression. They resemble the discourse of ignorant storytellers and sophists more than that of scholars who argue on the basis of truth. How apt were the words of Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, concerning Bishr al-Marīsī, the leader of the Jahmiyyah: “He was a man of speeches, not of proofs.” Indeed, these words fall below even the discourse of orators and those who offer proofs.

Second, he should be asked: “Was there not enough in the teachings handed down from the prophets and messengers to dispense, in the greatest objects of inquiry and the noblest branches of knowledge, with what is reported from the teacher of those misguided distorters who departed from the truth established by reason and religion—the leader of these eternalists? Moreover, you do not know that these words are authentically attributable to him; you merely said, ‘what is reported from him.’ Thus there is a break in its transmission from these Sabian distorters.”