Explanation of the author's statement: ". . . 2: That interpreting it as seizing power entails false consequences that cannot be refuted, such as contradicting the consensus of the Salaf, and the permissibility of saying

The Shaykh :"Second, that interpreting it as seizing power entails false consequences that cannot be refuted, such as contradicting the consensus of the Salaf". This is one of the false consequences that follow from interpreting Allah's Istiwa as seizing power. We say, you are now contradicting the consensus of the Salaf. Well, what is the result of contradicting the consensus of the Salaf?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : They are men, and we are men. How so?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : No, it is not possible, because a prior consensus cannot be overturned, due to the saying of Allah the Exalted: So you are now following a path other than the path of the believers. Then we say, you have contradicted the true Salaf. Either you are with them, or you are with the Salaf. If you say you are with the Salaf, then you have judged against yourself, or not? And if you say you are with yourself, apart from the Salaf, that is even uglier and uglier. It means you have led astray every Salaf of the Ummah, even though guidance comes to us only through their path. So the result is that contradicting the consensus of the Salaf is misguidance and falsehood.
Likewise, it entails from the false consequences "the permissibility of saying that Allah is established over the earth and the like", because He is established over the earth. Is it possible for any Muslim to say that Allah the Exalted created the heavens and the earth and then established Himself over the earth? It is never possible. Is it possible for any Muslim to say that Allah is established on the back of a camel? No, it is not possible. So this is a false consequence.
Also, the third false consequence is that it is permissible to say, as a contradiction, yes, "and that Allah the Exalted was not seizing power over the Throne when He created the heavens and the earth". It follows from their saying that Istiwa means seizing power that the Throne, when the heavens and the earth were created, belonged to someone other than Allah, right or not? Because Allah says: So the Throne would be in the possession of someone other than Allah during this period, but then fierce wars occurred and Allah seized power over the Throne. This is their talk. For this reason, I recall that once, when we were speaking to common people, we said that the innovators say, "Then He established Himself over the Throne, then He seized power over the Throne." May Allah sift them out; how diminished are their minds! And how so? Well, to whom did the Throne belong before this? Look, he is a common person who understood that this is something impossible, and he is correct if we interpret it as seizing power, yes.