His being above the world, this cannot legitimately be denied. Moreover, the revealed texts, together with the innate disposition, indicate this. On this premise, therefore, He must be separate from the world.”

This is a “sound analysis,” to which attention has also been drawn earlier. These negationists treat reason as authoritative when it supports them, but not when it counts against them. They argue against their opponents on the basis of self-evident propositions, yet oppose them concerning propositions that are even more self-evident. Every objection they raise can be turned against their own position. For example, they say, “This is a judgment of imagination and fancy, not of reason.” This very objection can be raised against their argument here. They may be told:

“Your denial of the existence of a being separate from the world, who is neither a body nor occupies space, is a judgment of imagination and fancy, not of reason.”

Let the discerning reader reflect carefully on this point.

(The third response:

The position of someone who accepts that He occupies space, is in a direction, or is a body, and says: “There is no evidence for denying any of these things, and the arguments advanced by those who deny them are unsound.” They agree that the denial of these things is not known self-evidently; rather, they claim to establish it through discursive reasoning. Yet those who deny these things have not agreed upon a single proof. Instead, each challenges the proof of the other.

As for the philosophers who deny these things on the basis of denying the attributes, the negationists among the speculative theologians—together with other rational thinkers and proponents of affirmation—challenge their proofs with the well-known objections that demonstrate their unsoundness. The speculative theologians who deny these things, together with other rational thinkers and proponents of affirmation, also challenge the proofs of the negationist philosophers: namely, the argument based on the temporal origination of whatever has accidents and acts subsisting in it.