God must either exist as a whole in every place or time, or only part of him does. But if he partly exists in every place or time, he has parts, which is false. Therefore he doesn’t exist partly everywhere and always (36). How is it possible that he exists as a whole everywhere and always? Either he exists as a whole all at once in all places and times and by parts in each individual place and time, or he exists as a whole even in each individual place and time. The first scenario isn’t relevant as he cannot exist in any parts. However, it is possible that he can exist as a whole in both places and times in each one individually, which can only be the case either all at once or at separate times. Up to this point, these two arguments have followed the correct path concerning place and time; however, there is a flaw (36). If he exists as a whole in individual places, the individual wholes exist in individual places. Every place has its own distinct characteristics, which would make him existing as a whole different in every place known as him existing as individual wholes. Therefore, if something exists as a whole in a specific place, there is nothing of that thing that exists at the same time in some other place. This concludes that if something exists as a whole in a given place, it is not possible for that whole to exist at the same time in some other place, because nothing of it can exist in any other place (37). Since one whole cannot exist as a whole all at once in individual places, then it must exist as individual wholes in individual places. If this thought was to be true, then the supreme nature would exist as a whole at a single moment in all individual places, which again, cannot happen due to the fact that the supreme nature cannot be present in separate parts (37).
To link to this page, copy the following code to your site:
All Papers Are For Research And Reference Purposes Only!
You may not turn these papers in as your own! You must cite our web site as your source!
