a body is never free of accidents that come into existence, nor does it precede them. Whatever is inseparable from events and does not precede them must itself have come into existence.”

Yet scriptural and rational proofs have established the position of the early generations: that the Lord has always spoken whenever He wills. Their position would therefore entail that He neither preceded events nor was ever separate from them. According to their position, He must consequently have come into existence. Thus, the very principle by which they established the existence of the Eternal entails that He is not eternal and that nothing eternal exists. Likewise, the others’ principle entails that He is not necessary in Himself and that nothing necessary in itself exists. The approach by which they claim to establish the Maker’s existence contradicts the affirmation of His existence.

If they say, “Knowledge of the Maker is possible only through this approach,” the correct response is: “Rather, complete knowledge of the Maker is possible only with knowledge of the invalidity of this approach.” Hence, everyone who accepts its validity has denied some of what the Messenger reported concerning matters that necessarily belong to the Lord. Denying a necessary concomitant entails denying that which it necessarily accompanies.

Those who claim to use this as proof that bodies came into existence argue along the same lines as those others who claim to use it as proof that bodies are contingent. Both arguments are invalid.