“I do not concede that an infinite regress necessarily follows,” or he says: “I do not concede that an infinite regress of effects is impossible.” These, then, are four challenges that must be considered. They cannot all be invalid; at least one must be sound. Whichever is sound answers the objection, which is the intended purpose. This is because the rational division exhausts the possibilities in the alternatives mentioned. Whoever finds one of these alternatives tenable adopts it. Elsewhere, we have discussed at length the foundations of this issue, its implications, and people’s positions on it. Our purpose here is to defend the Muslims collectively, for this objection is among those raised against people by the proponents of the eternity of the world. We have given several answers to it in our writings responding to the specious argument of those who maintain that the world is eternal.

Among their answers is the following:

This objection does not apply exclusively to the world’s coming into being. Rather, it applies to every event that comes into being in existence. That things come into being is witnessed, perceived by the senses, and agreed upon by rational people. Thus, whatever objection someone raises against the heavens and the earth having been created with a beginning, an equivalent objection can be raised against him concerning events that are directly witnessed. We have indicated the kinds of arguments advanced by each group in this discussion. However, an exhaustive treatment would exceed the scope of these pages and would not be appropriate here.