the objection is that it is said time is an accident and a creation and there was no time before it at all and what we mean by our saying that god precedes the world and time is that he was and there was no world then he was and there was a world with him. the meaning of our saying he was and there was no world is the existence of the essence of the creator and the nonessence of the world only and the meaning of our saying he was and there was a world with him is the existence of the two selves only. so we mean by precedence his being alone in existence and the world as one person. if we were to say god was and there was no jesus for example then he was and jesus was with him the expression would only imply the existence of an essence and the nonessence of an essence then…
الاعتراض هو أن يقال الزمان حادث ومخلوق وليس قبله زمان أصلا، ونعني بقولنا إن الله متقدم على العالم والزمان إنه كان ولا عالم ثم كان ومعه عالم. ومفهوم قولنا كان ولا عالم، وجود ذات الباري وعدم ذات العالم فقط، ومفهوم قولنا كان ومعه عالم، وجود الذاتين فقط. فنعني بالتقدم انفراده بالوجود فقط، والعالم كشخص واحد. ولو قلنا كان الله ولا عيسى مثلا ثم كان وعيسى معه لم يتضمن اللفظ إلا وجود ذات وعدم ذات ثم