And it was recited: 'Their argument' with both the accusative and nominative, based on the precedence and delay of the news of 'was'. If you say: Why is their saying called an argument when it is not an argument? I say: Because they presented it as an argument, just as one who argues presents his argument, and they brought it forth in that manner, so it was called an argument in a mocking way. Or because it is, in their estimation and calculation, an argument. Or because it is in the style of the saying: 'A greeting between them is a painful blow.' [[The explanation of this evidence was previously mentioned in the first part, page 60, so refer to it if you wish, the corrector said.]] It is as if it were said: Their argument was nothing but what is not an argument at all. The intended meaning is to deny that they have any argument whatsoever. If you say: How did the saying 'Say, Allah gives you life' respond to their saying 'Bring us our forefathers if you are truthful'? I say: When they denied resurrection and lied about the messengers, and thought that what they said was a refutation, they were obliged by what they were firmly committed to: that Allah, the Exalted, is the One who gives them life and then causes them to die. And it was added to this obligation what is necessary to acknowledge if they were fair and listened to the call of truth, which is gathering them to the Day of Resurrection. And whoever is capable of that is certainly capable of bringing forth their forefathers, and it would be the easiest thing for Him.