De Aeternitate Mundi

In every uncertain and important business it is proper to invoke God, because he is the good Creator of the world, and because nothing is uncertain with him who is possessed of the most accurate knowledge of all things. But of all times it is most necessary to invoke him when one is preparing to discuss the incorruptibility of the world; for neither among the things which are visible to the outward senses is there anything more admirably complete than the world, nor among things appreciable by the intellect is there anything more perfect than God. But the mind is at all times the governor of the outward sense, and that which is appreciable by the intellect is at all times superior to that which is visible to the outward senses, but those persons in whom there is implanted a vigorous and earnest love of truth willingly undergo the trouble of making inquiries relative to the subordinate things, from that which is superior to and the ruler over them.

If then, we, who have been practised and trained in all the doctrines of prudence, and temperance, and virtue, have discarded all the stains of the passions and diseases, perhaps God would not disdain to give to souls completely purified and cleansed, so as to appear in his image, a knowledge of heavenly things either by means of dreams, or of oracles, or of signs, or of wonders. But since we have on us the marks of folly, and injustice, and of all other vices strongly stamped upon us and difficult to be effaced, we must be content even if we are only able by them to discover some faint copy and imitation of the truth.

It is right, therefore, for those who are investigating the question whether the world is perishable, since the two words, "corruption," and "the world," will be in continual use, first of all to investigate the precise meaning of both expressions, in order that we may know what is now signified, and what has been ordained. And we must enumerate, not indeed everything which is signified by those words, but so much as is useful for the purpose of our present instruction.

The world, therefore, is spoken of in its primary sense

And the term corruption is used to signify a change for the worse; it is also used to signify the utter destruction of that which exists, a destruction so complete as to have no existence at all; for as nothing is generated out of nothing, so neither can anything which exists be destroyed so as to become non-existence. [*](This is similar to Lucretius’s doctrine- Nil igitur fieri de nihilo posse putandum est. ) For it is impossible that anything should be generated of that which has no existence anywhere, as equally so that what does exist should be so utterly destroyed as never to be mentioned or heard of again. And indeed in this spirit the tragedian says:— "Nought that e’er has been Completely dies, but things combined Before another union find; Quitting their former company, And so again in other forms are seen." [*](From the Chrysippus of Euripides. )

Nor is it so very silly a thing to doubt whether the world is destroyed so as to pass into a state of non-existence, but rather whether it is subjected to a change from a new arrangement, being dissolved as to all the manifold forms of its elements and combinations so as to assume one and the same appearance, or whether, like a thing broken and dashed to pieces, it is subjected to a complete confusion of its different fragments. [*](This is similar to Lucretius’s doctrine- Nil igitur fieri de nihilo posse putandum est. ) [*](From the Chrysippus of Euripides. )

And there are three different opinions on the subject which we are at present discussing. Since some persons affirm that the world is eternal, and uncreated, and not liable to any destruction; while others, on the contrary, say that it has been created and is destructible. There are also others who take a portion of each of these two opinions, agreeing with the last-mentioned sect that it has been created, but with the former class that it is indestructible; and thus they have left behind them a mixed opinion, thinking that it is at the same time created and imperishable.

However, Democritus and Epicurus, and the principal number of the Stoic philosophers, affirm both the creation and the destructibility of the world, though they do not all speak in similar senses; for some give a sketch of many worlds, the generation of which they attribute to the concourse and combination of atoms, and their destruction they impute to the dissolution and breaking up of the combined particles. But the Stoics speak of one world only, and affirm that God is the cause of its creation, but that the cause of its corruption is no longer God, but the power of invincible, unwearied fire, which pervades all existing things, in the long periods of time dissolving everything into itself, while from it again a regeneration of the world takes place through the providence of the Creator.

And according to these men there may be one world spoken of as eternal and another as destructible, destructible in reference to its present arrangement, and eternal as to the conflagration which takes place, since it is rendered immortal by regenerations and periodical revolutions which never cease.

But Aristotle, with a knowledge as to which I know not to what degree I may call it holy and pious, affirmed that the world was uncreated and indestructible, and he accused those who maintained a contrary opinion of terrible impiety, for thinking that so great a visible God was in no respect different from things made with hands, though he contains within himself the sun, and the moon, and all the rest of the planets and fixed stars, and, in fact, the whole of the divine nature;

and he said in a cavilling and reproachful tone, that formerly he had feared for his house lest it should be overthrown by violent gales, or extraordinary storms, or by lapse of time, or through the want of the proper care requisite to preserve it,

But some say that it was not Aristotle who invented this doctrine, but some of the Pythagoreans; but I have met with a work of Ocellus, a Lucanian by birth, entitled, "A Treatise on the Nature of the Universe," in which he has not only asserted that the world is indestructible, but he has even endeavoured to prove it so by demonstrative proofs.

But some say that the world has been proved by Plato in the Timaeus to be both uncreated and indestructible, in the account of that divine assembly in which the younger gods are addressed by the eldest and the governor of them all in the following terms; [*](Timaeus, p. 40. )"O ye gods of gods, those works of which I am the father and the creator are indissoluble as long as I choose that they shall be so. Now everything which has been bound together is capable of being dissolved, but it is the part of an evil ruler to dissolve that which has been well combined and arranged, and which is in good condition. Wherefore, since you also have been created, you are not of necessity immortal or utterly indissoluble; nevertheless you shall not be dissolved, nor shall you be exposed to the fate of death, inasmuch as you have my will to keep you united, which is a still greater and more powerful bond than those by which you were bound together when you were first created."

But some persons interpret Plato’s words sophistically, and think that he affirms that the world was created, not inasmuch as it has had a beginning of creation, but inasmuch as if it had been created it could not possibly have existed in any other manner than that in which it actually does exist as has been described, or else because it is in its creation and change that the parts are seen.

But the forementioned opinion is better and truer, not only because throughout the whole treatise he affirms that the Creator of the gods is also the father and creator and maker of everything, and that the world is a most beautiful work of his and his offspring, being an imitation visible to the outward senses of an archetypal model appreciable only by the intellect, comprehending in itself as many objects of the outward senses as the model does objects [*](Timaeus, p. 40. )

But also because Aristotle bears witness to this fact in the case of Plato, who, from his great reverence for philosophy, would never have spoken falsely, and also because no one can possibly be more to be credited in the case of a teacher than his pupil, especially when the pupil is such a man as this who did not apply himself to instruction lightly with an indifference easily satisfied, but who even endeavoured to surpass all the discoveries of former men, and did actually devise some novelties and enrich every part of philosophy with some most important discoveries.

But some persons think that the father of the Platonic theory was the poet Hesiod, as they conceive that the world is spoken of by him as created and indestructible; as created, when he says, —

Now Chaos was conceived by Aristotle to be a place, because it is absolutely necessary that a place to receive them must be in existence before bodies. But some of the Stoics think that it is water, imagining that its name has been derived from effusion. [*](Χύσις, as if chaos were derived from Χέω, " to pour." ) But however that may be, it is exceedingly plain that the world is spoken of by Hesiod as having been created:

and a very long time before him Moses, the lawgiver of the Jews, had said in his sacred volumes that the world was both created and indestructible, and the number of the books is five. The first of which he entitled Genesis, in which he begins in the following manner: "in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth; and the earth was invisible and without form." Then proceeding onwards he relates in the following verses, that days and nights, and seasons, and years, and the sun and moon, which showed the nature of the measurement [*](There is probably some corruption in the text here, ) [*](Hesiod, Theogon 116. ) [*](Χύσις, as if chaos were derived from Χέω, " to pour." )

But we must place those arguments first which make out the world to be uncreated and indestructible, because of our respect for that which is visible, employing an appropriate commencement. To all things which are liable to destruction there are two causes of that destruction, one being internal and the other external; therefore you may find iron, and brass, and all other substances of that kind destroyed by themselves when rust, like a creeping disease, overruns and devours them; and by external causes when, if a house or a city is burnt, they also are consumed in the conflagration, being melted by the violent impetuosity of the fire. A similar end also befalls animals, partly when they are sick of diseases arising internally, and partly when they are destroyed by external causes, being sacrificed, or stoned, or burnt, or when they endure an unclean death by hanging.