Thus, if it is said, “He cannot bring events about; rather, what He produces is inseparable from His essence,” this would be an imperfection compared with one who has the power to act and does one thing after another.

Likewise, if it is said, “Making one and the same thing moving and motionless, existent and nonexistent, is an attribute of perfection,” the reply is: This is intrinsically impossible.

Likewise, if it is said, “Bringing into being something eternal whose existence is necessary in itself is an attribute of perfection,” the reply is: This is intrinsically impossible. For its being brought into being entails that its existence is not necessary in itself, but necessary through another. To say that it necessarily exists through itself, yet was brought into existence only through another, is to affirm two contradictories together.

Likewise, if it is said, “As for the acts subsisting in Him and the effects distinct from Him: if His being characterized by them is an attribute of perfection, then He lacked them from eternity; and if it is an attribute of imperfection, then He must be characterized by imperfections,” the reply is: It is impossible for each of the acts dependent on His will and power to be eternal.

Moreover, their existence from eternity need not be an attribute of perfection. Rather, perfection consists in their existing when wisdom requires their existence.

Furthermore, if they were eternal, they would not come into existence one after another. Thus, to say of things whose proper mode of existence is to come into being one after another, “They ought to exist from eternity,” is to affirm two contradictories together. There are many similar examples.

This is why we said, “perfection whose existence is possible.” Whatever is intrinsically impossible has no reality, let alone can it be said to exist or to be a perfection of an existent being.