Thus, the deniers of divine decree among the Mu'tazilah and others—who maintain that Allah did not create His servants’ acts and did not will anything to occur except what He commanded—together with their extremists, who deny Allah’s prior knowledge and recording of His servants’ future acts, held that injustice on His part would be like the injustice human beings commit against one another. They likened His acts to those of His servants, thus becoming likeners of divine acts to human acts. They drew comparisons for Allah rather than ascribing to Him the highest description. Indeed, they declared things obligatory or forbidden for Him according to what they considered obligatory or forbidden for His servants, drawing an analogy between Him and His servants and establishing the ruling in the original case through personal opinion.

On this basis, they said: “If He commands a servant but does not assist him with every form of assistance within His power, He wrongs him.” They committed themselves to the conclusion that He cannot guide someone who is astray, just as they said that He cannot lead a rightly guided person astray. They also said: “If He gives two people the same command but singles out one of them for assistance in carrying it out, He is unjust.” They said similar things about other matters of grace and kindness, treating His withholding of them as injustice.

Likewise, they supposed that punishing someone whose act had been decreed would be an injustice to him. They failed to distinguish between punishing someone in whom the grounds for deserving punishment were present and someone in whom they were not—even if He created that state of deserving punishment for another wise purpose, whether general or particular.

Here, feet have slipped and understandings have gone astray. Others among the speculative theologians who affirm divine decree opposed them, saying:

“Injustice on His part has no reality