The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 05 (of 11)
Thomas Hobbes · en
“But the chiefest difficulty which offers itself in this section is,
whether eternity be an indivisible point, as I maintain it; or an
everlasting succession, as he would have it. According to his constant
use, he gives no answer to what was urged by me, but pleads against it
from his own incapacity. ‘I never could conceive,’ saith he, ‘how
eternity should be an indivisible point.’ I believe, that neither we nor
any man else can comprehend it so clearly as we do these inferior
things. The nearer that anything comes to the essence of God, the more
remote it is from our apprehension. But shall we therefore make
potentialities, and successive duration, and former and later, or a part
without a part, as they say, to be in God? Because we are not able to
understand clearly the divine perfection, we must not therefore
attribute any imperfection to him.
(_h_) “He saith moreover, that ‘he understands as little how it can be
true which I say, that God is not just but justice itself, not eternal
but eternity itself.’ It seems, howsoever he be versed in this question,
that he hath not troubled his head overmuch with reading School-divines
or metaphysicians, if he make faculties or qualities to be in God really
distinct from his essence. God is a most simple or pure act, which can
admit no composition of substance and accidents. Doth he think, that the
most perfect essence of God cannot act sufficiently without faculties
and qualities? The infinite perfection of the Divine essence excludes
all passive or receptive powers, and cannot be perfected more than it is
by any accidents. The attributes of God are not divers virtues or
qualities in him, as they are in the creatures; but really one and the
same with the Divine essence, and among themselves. They are attributed
to God to supply the defect of our capacity, who are not able to
understand that which is to be known of God under one name, or one act
of the understanding.
“Furthermore he saith, that ‘he understands not how I conclude from
hence, that eternity is an indivisable point, and not a succession’.
(_i_) I will help him. The Divine substance is indivisible; but eternity
is the Divine substance. The major is evident, because God is _actus
simplicissimus_, a most simple act; wherein there is no manner of
composition, neither of matter and form, nor of subject and accidents,
nor of parts, &c; and by consequence no divisibility. The minor hath
been clearly demonstrated in mine answer to his last doubt, and is
confessed by all men that whatsoever is in God, is God.