denying that He is spatially located does not entail denying that He is upon the Throne. The claims of self-evidence made by both sides in this matter have already been discussed.

The second case concerns someone who does not deny this, but either concedes it or refrains from affirming or denying it. This case may be addressed from several angles.

First, we do not concede that, if He were situated in any particular spatial region or direction, He would be like spatially located things. The argument he presents rests on the assumption that spatially located things are alike. This has already been refuted, and there is no need to repeat that refutation. It has also been explained that the view that the two are alike is among the weakest views—indeed, among those most contrary to sense perception, reason, and what the great majority of rational people hold.

Second, his statement: “If He were situated in a particular spatial region, His occupying that region would mean that He prevents anything else from being where He is.”