CHAPTER V
more opposite than 'to come toward' and 'to go away from*? Yet we know that when someone goes from one place to another, the same movement is both ' com ing toward' and 'going away from.' For in going away from one place he comes toward another. Or again, if we consider the sun, ever hastening to some part of the heavens in its journey across them, we see that the place from which it withdraws and the place to which it returns are the same. Moreover, we see that all the while the sun is approaching this place it is also leaving it. To those who are not unlearned it is also clear that with respect to the heavens the sun ever makes its transit from the western quarter to the eastern one, whereas with respect to the earth it only moves from east to west. Thus, the sun always moves both counter to the firmament and, although more slowly, with the firmament--as we notice with regard to all planets, /we see, then, that opposite characteristics may be ascribed to the same thing in different respects^ For this reason there is no inconsistency in maintaining that some thing is necessarily going to happen (simply because it is going to happen) and also that it is not compelled to happen by necessity, except for the necessity with which, as I said before, an action follows from a free choice.
CHAPTER V
Someone might point to the statement which Job made to God concerning man 'You haveestablished his end, which cannot be escaped' (job l4:5), and from this try to show, in spite of the fact that people sometimes seem to cause their own deaths by their own free will, that no one can hasten or change the day of his death. But this would not produce a valid argument against what we have said above. Now, since God cannot be deceived and since He sees only what is true--whether this results from necessity or from freedom--He is said.; to have established immutably within Himself the very thing which
within man can be changed before it occurs. Thus it is that the Apostle Paul says of those who are called to be saints according to God's purpose: 'Those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. For whom He predestined, them He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified.' (Rom. 1:7; 8:28,29) Now this purpose, according to which these men are called to be saints, is within eternity an immutable purpose, for within eternity there is no past or future but only a present; but in the men themselves this purpose is sometimes mutable because of human freedom of choice. For though we can only say that something within eternity does occur, never that it has occurred or will occur, still we do say without contradicting ourselves that a temporal event has occurred or will occur. Accordingly, it is possible to show without any inconsistency that a thing which is eternally immutable may sometimes, before it actually occurs, be mutable within time because of free will.
Even though nothing exists within eternity except the present, neverthe less this is not a temporal present as we know it but an eternal present in which the whole of time is contained. Just as the temporal present encom passes every place and everything whatsoever that is occurring in these places, so too does the eternal present contain the whole of time and everything which is in time. Thus, when the Apostle declares that God foreknew, predestined, called, justified, and glorified his saints, we must understand that none of these occurs earlier or later than the others for God, but that all of them are together at once within an eternal present. For eternity has its own present and encompasses all the things that occur at the same time and place, and at different times and places.
:. *f \
In order to show that he was not using these words in their temporal sig nification, the same Apostle used verbs in the past tense to refer even to future events. For, temporally speaking, God has not already called, justi fied, and glorified those whom He foreknows are still to be born. From this we can see that for want of a verb that would adequately signify the eternal present, the Apostle used verbs of past tense; for things which are temporally past are altogether immutable, and in this way resemble the eternal present.
In this respect the temporal past is more like the eternal present than the temporal present. For what is temporally past can never be not-past just as what is eternally present can never be not--present; but all temporally present things which pass away with time do become not-present.
Accordingly, Holy Scripture speaks of everything that occurs through free choice as if it were necessary. In this way it speaks in accordance with the eternal order, where all truth and only truth is present immutably. It does not speak in accordance with the temporal order, wherein our volitions and actions do not exist forever. Indeed, it is not necessary that our volitions and actions exist before such time as they do exist; moreover it is often not even necessary that they should exist at any time. For example, I am not en gaged in writing all the time, nor do I always want to write. Now, when I am not writing or wanting to write, it is not necessary for me to write or to want to write. By the same token there is no necessity that I should ever write or want to write.
A thing's existence in time is so different from its existence in eternity that at a given moment something may not be present in time which is present in eternity or something may be past in time without being past in eternity or may be future in time without being future in eternity. When we realize this,
' '