93 
it would be a degradation of the Supreme to think of Him 
as simply being, or containing, the sum of the Parmenides 
Perfections known to the mind of man ; since He and the Elea- 
must be far above them. This was the original 1C8 ‘ 
error of the Philosophy ; for thus it interpreted Perfection 
in relation only to the phenomenal, not distinguishing the 
true-always. To think thus of the perfection of the Supremo 
Being was to err still further, by depending on some artificial 
distinctions as to time and space; and regarding them 
physically. “ Time and space ” (it was said) “ imply diversity, 
continuity, extension, division. Since God is One, and Per- 
fect, He is above time and space, and exists apart. All move- 
ment and all action imply time and space, and these signify 
limitations,” &c. — 
(Here there is another confusion of thinking to be pointed 
out, because if space exists, it co-exists in all its infinity, and 
time does not, for time marks sequence only. Every phe- 
nomenon, of course, has relation to both time and space; 
but the true-always has no necessary relation, a, priori , to 
either. Both time and space are conditions of the phenomenal, 
or of the abstract when in relation with the phenomenal.) 
62. Proceeding, however, from this, the Eleatics would go 
on thus : — 
“ If the Supreme be Infinite, how can the Infinite have movement ? And is not 
even Thought a kind of movement, having beginning, and progress, — priority, 
and subsequence ? Then how can thought be attributed to 
God ? If He thinks, He has but one thought ; and if He acts, t endency° 81C of 
He is pure act, ever going forth and never changing. Then it Pantheism to 
would seem that His Act exists not apart from Him, for He is 
Infinite, as has been said. Can He, then, have any movement ? Does it 
not imply change of Relation, if not more ? A movement from better 
to worse is inconsistent with the nature of a Perfect Being ; but movement 
from worse to better no less denies the original Perfection.” 
(Here the more than double sense of “ movement,” or 
Ktvrjaig, vitiates all the reasoning — interior and exterior move- 
ment being confounded — the movement of consciousness and 
the movement of action — the ideal and the physical.) 
63. In these speculations it would almost seem that there is 
no escape from a denial of Him whom we have to recognize as 
Supreme Moral Governor ! Their Supreme has no past, no 
future, no retrospect, no prospect, no thought, no deed ! Can 
He deliberate ? That implies a waiting for phenomena, which 
is hesitation. Can He resolve ? That implies previous inde- 
cision. Can Ho judge ? Then must He not poise the pheno- 
