Strictures on ‘“ the Non-Eternity of the World.” 
doing, and oh being, can act. where. it 
dog 
eb sh 2 here a a ‘satisfactory de- 
imonstre i ats, By th; hat, Het cannot be two 
ipo! a sane e definition by 
‘he. bouche to bear suc- 
qj p int. ‘There cannot 
be \ ia Pea o heings, be; 
a so, they must have distinct 
whi hich isumpossible, onthe sup- 
apie eternally. self- existent 
si power that 2 is. In fine, 
aire e two omnipotents, be- 
~ orth be two eternals, as 
teyer is munipotent must be eternal. 
‘. - €, grand consequence here 
fen, om; the preceding arguments 
is, declared to be, that a being, omnipo- 
tent;. eternal, and indivisible, is conse- 
quently, zmmaterial,. and that the visible 
world | being both material and divisible, 
it,cannot be self-existent, and conse- 
tly has, not, existed from eternity, 
ene; under its present modification or 
in a. chaotic state. 
i 1058 ¢ Cominentator, i in his observations 
on the eighth clause, says that the ar- 
guments of the Inquirer do not even 
touch, the question of the eternity or 
non-eternity of matter; but I think the 
Inquirer does seriously affect the ques- 
tion, where he says that the natural 
world being material and divisible, is, 
consequently, finite ; or, in other words, 
whatever is indivisible is consequently 
immaterial, eternal, and self-existent, 
because. whatever is material is finite 
and divisible, or consisting of separate 
and. distinct. parts; for, as above stated, 
there’ can be no division without a de- 
i if either real or. imaginary. 
atter were the eternally self-exist- 
oat being, then again, as above shewn, 
very,part.or modification must possess 
Saarinen: of the aggregate, and thus 
man,would be omnipotent. Farther, 
matter, .we know, is subjected. to con- 
stant change, and. one part is capable of 
ehanging/another, i.e, of changing, if 
not {itsessential, properties, those, at 
least;., which arise from.a particular or- 
3and, this. invariably and ne~ 
‘ily.implies a superiority of power 
ene grea the agent over the power 
d. by, the object. acted upon, 
a ceegarves the,self-existent cannot 
ehange another, because, one, part, can- 
not be superior.to,another. , That which 
igindestructible in. its,own nature, can- 
Woride conceived of as, ah P SOR as 
é would, i involve, the ¢X- 
jstence of a, power. which, by the, suppo- 
WEEP GOD REVEE cet. But matter 
Mon tay Mac.—! Supp. 
537 
may be conceived of as destroyed, and 
with respect to our globe, we can,clear- 
ly conceive of its total extinction rom. 
the universe, and if a. part of the 
verse may be,conceived of as annihi na 
the whole may be so conceived 9 Ftoo. 
- Again, that which. is infinite. cannot 
a conceived of as limited, as such con 
ception would again be absurd, but m 
ter may be eonceived of as limited. pi 
the systems of worlds in the universe 
may be imagined to be enclosed within 
one mighty, boundary, beyond which is 
empty space. I say, the mind can dis- 
tinctly form these ideas, which demon- 
strates the possibility that. matter_is, 
finite, and if possibility, then absolute 
certainty. We cannot imagine any ag- 
gregate of matter, so large as not to ad- 
mit of being made larger, nor any so, 
small as that: it cannot be made smaller ; 
empty space will always stretch beyond. 
our utmost conceptions of magnitude ; 
yet this very idea of matter being, in-, 
definitely divisible and extensible, | pre-, 
cludes the possibility of its infinity, and. 
of its possessing any one of the attri- 
butes ofan eternal being. Now, whether 
space be something or nothing—whether 
it be merely the relation which one part, 
of matter bears to another with respect. 
to distance—whether it be an abstract. 
or concrete term, cannot perhaps be 
positively determined. Yet one. thing 
is certain respecting it, and on that ac- 
count it serves well to explain what I 
understand by wyinite. I. challenge 
any—even the most acutely. metaphy- 
sical minds, to conceive, what we call, 
a either limited or annihilated, 
9.—This clause contains logic, . the 
precise import of which is rendered in-, 
determinate by the vague use of the 
term world. If by the term, is meant 
that particular modification. of matter 
we call the earth, then are the. premises, 
false, and of consequence the conclu- 
sions therefrom. deduced, The premises, 
are false when they assert, that the parts 
of the earth are produced in succession 
by some previous external cause, That 
which is produced must be an effect, 
and it has been above shewn, that the. 
only effects.in the earth with which we 
are acquainted are certain modifications 
of matter, and not particles of matter. 
When achild, a plant, or a stone are. 
produced, the ‘particles of matter which, 
compose. these bodies are not then, pro-, 
duced or brought into existence, for, 
of them existed previously, , only. une er 
a different form, or in some, of t 
even under the saine forin— though in a 
3 Z 
