FIRST ARTICLE [I, Q. 10, Art. 1]

Whether This Is a Good Definition of Eternity, "The Simultaneously-

Whole and Perfect Possession of Interminable Life"?

Objection 1: It seems that the definition of eternity given by

Boethius (De Consol. v) is not a good one: "Eternity is the

simultaneously-whole and perfect possession of interminable life." For

the word "interminable" is a negative one. But negation only belongs

to what is defective, and this does not belong to eternity. Therefore

in the definition of eternity the word "interminable" ought not to be

found.

Obj. 2: Further, eternity signifies a certain kind of duration.

But duration regards existence rather than life. Therefore the word

"life" ought not to come into the definition of eternity; but rather

the word "existence."

Obj. 3: Further, a whole is what has parts. But this is alien to

eternity which is simple. Therefore it is improperly said to be

"whole."

Obj. 4: Many days cannot occur together, nor can many times exist

all at once. But in eternity, days and times are in the plural, for it

is said, "His going forth is from the beginning, from the days of

eternity" (Micah 5:2); and also it is said, "According to the

revelation of the mystery hidden from eternity" (Rom. 16:25).

Therefore eternity is not omni-simultaneous.

Obj. 5: Further, the whole and the perfect are the same thing.

Supposing, therefore, that it is "whole," it is superfluously

described as "perfect."

Obj. 6: Further, duration does not imply "possession." But eternity

is a kind of duration. Therefore eternity is not possession.

_I answer that,_ As we attain to the knowledge of simple things by way

of compound things, so must we reach to the knowledge of eternity by

means of time, which is nothing but the numbering of movement by

_before_ and _after._ For since succession occurs in every movement,

and one part comes after another, the fact that we reckon before and

after in movement, makes us apprehend time, which is nothing else but

the measure of before and after in movement. Now in a thing bereft of

movement, which is always the same, there is no before or after. As

therefore the idea of time consists in the numbering of before and

after in movement; so likewise in the apprehension of the uniformity

of what is outside of movement, consists the idea of eternity.

Further, those things are said to be measured by time which have a

beginning and an end in time, because in everything which is moved

there is a beginning, and there is an end. But as whatever is wholly

immutable can have no succession, so it has no beginning, and no end.

Thus eternity is known from two sources: first, because what is

eternal is interminable--that is, has no beginning nor end (that is,

no term either way); secondly, because eternity has no succession,

being simultaneously whole.

Reply Obj. 1: Simple things are usually defined by way of negation;

as "a point is that which has no parts." Yet this is not to be taken

as if the negation belonged to their essence, but because our

intellect which first apprehends compound things, cannot attain to

the knowledge of simple things except by removing the opposite.

Reply Obj. 2: What is truly eternal, is not only being, but also

living; and life extends to operation, which is not true of being.

Now the protraction of duration seems to belong to operation rather

than to being; hence time is the numbering of movement.

Reply Obj. 3: Eternity is called whole, not because it has parts, but

because it is wanting in nothing.

Reply Obj. 4: As God, although incorporeal, is named in Scripture

metaphorically by corporeal names, so eternity though simultaneously

whole, is called by names implying time and succession.

Reply Obj. 5: Two things are to be considered in time: time itself,

which is successive; and the "now" of time, which is imperfect. Hence

the expression "simultaneously-whole" is used to remove the idea of

time, and the word "perfect" is used to exclude the "now" of time.

Reply Obj. 6: Whatever is possessed, is held firmly and quietly;

therefore to designate the immutability and permanence of eternity,

we use the word "possession."

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part I (Prima Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 72 / 722 题