199 



tjhey now are, tlidy would then be in the same place too, 

 as they are ilow; which is an evident contradiction. 



Space is not a being, an eternal and infinite being; but 

 the property, or consequence of a Being, eternal, and in- 

 finite* Infinite space is immensity, but immensity is not 

 God. Infinite space is one, absolutely and essentially in- 

 divisible.. To suppose it parted, is a contradiction in 

 terms, as there must be space in the partition itself; which 

 is to suppose it parted, and not parted, at the same time. 

 The immensity, or omnipresence of God, is no more a di- 

 vision of his substance^ into parts, than his duration is a 

 division of his existence into parts. Thfere is no difficulty 

 here, but from the figurative abuse of the word parts. 



If space were nothing but the order of co-existing things, 

 it would follow, that, if God should move, in a straight 

 line, the whole material world, with any degree of velocity 

 soever,; yet it would still' continue in the same place, and 

 nothing would receive a shock on the sudden stopping of 

 the motion. — Farther, space is a quantky, which oi^der and 

 situation are not. 



To argue, that, because space is uniform, and one part 

 does not difter from another, therefore, bodies created in 

 one place, if they had been created in- another, supposing 

 them to keep the same situation, Avith regard to each' 

 other,, would still be in; the: saiiie place j^g before, is a 

 manifest contradiction. 



Leibnitz. To suppose two things indiscernible, is to 

 suppose the same thing, under two names; therefore, to 



nisbuiifiirnJi^ 1 c -c 2 suppose 



