Are not those who have present justice in the hand of the Son? Yet they are scattered, according to what was said above: The wolf comes and scatters the sheep.
The response to this is that they are snatched away not from the weakness of the guardian, but from the infirmity of the one guarded.
Or according to Augustine, sheep are here understood according to eternal election, who cannot be snatched away finally. Whence Augustine: "Neither does the wolf snatch, nor does the thief steal, nor does the robber kill: he who has numbered them is secure concerning their number."
55. Question II. But then an inquiry is made concerning what he says: No one is able to snatch them from the hand of my Father.
Therefore those who are in the hand of God, as the predestined, cannot be damned: therefore they do not have the freedom of sinning finally.
To this Augustine seems to say simply that they cannot perish, in the book On the Good of Perseverance; nor however does free will perish, just as it also does not perish in those who are confirmed. It must be said, however, that no one can snatch them, because the Father does not permit violence to be done to his elect; whence: God is faithful, who will not permit you to be tempted beyond what you are able: and the devil cannot do violence to God, so as to tempt his servants beyond what he himself permits. Therefore the freedom of free will to sin remains in them, but the power to do violence and to snatch by force does not remain in the devil.
56. Question III. Likewise, there is a question about the Lord's response: because the Lord had called himself God and the Son of God, he showed that he did not blaspheme, through Scripture, which calls the servants of God gods.
This response seems to be worth nothing, because Scripture calls them gods by adoption; but he was calling himself God by essence: whence he said: I and the Father are one.
I respond: It must be said to this that when the Lord was disputing with the Jews, sometimes he responded to the argument, sometimes he responded to the man, because "one who entirely opposes must be entirely opposed." Whence when they asked by what authority he acted, and the Lord responded: Was the baptism of John from heaven, or from men? he bound them with his own question, Matthew twenty-one. So also now he responds to the man, in order to mitigate their anger, just as above in chapter eight he confuted their malice: Let him who is without sin among you cast the first stone at her.
It can however be said that he truly responded most excellently, because, since this name god is said in three ways: by nature, by participation, and by appellation, as in idols; this multiplicity has its origin from one root, just as the multiplicity of the term "healthy." Whence in the truest manner he is called God by nature, but in a lesser manner of speaking by participation, and least of all by appellation, because only according to estimation. Because therefore they were accusing him on the ground that he had attributed the name of god to himself: he proves that he can attribute it to himself without blasphemy; because, if a friend or adoptive son of God is called god, and God is truly honored without blasphemy: much more so he who is Son by nature: and this is an argument from the lesser.
57. Question IV. Likewise, there is a question about what they say: John indeed performed no sign:
1. Because it is said in Luke one: He shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah: therefore if the power of Elijah was in working miracles, it seems that the Lord ought to have given him the power of miracles.
2. Likewise, if there was none greater than John, and the Lord gave the power of miracles to the disciples who bore witness concerning him; why not similarly also to John?
I respond: It must be said that John was considered by many to be the Christ, as is clear from the first chapter; therefore, for men who judge by the senses, there had to be a sensible difference between John and Christ so that they could discern between them; but it ought not to have been in holiness of life, because it is necessary that a faithful witness be regarded as holy: therefore it was necessary that it be in the power of miracles .
1. To the objection concerning spirit and power, it must be said that the word of Elijah was fiery; so too was the word of John, as the Lord Himself said above in the fifth chapter: He was a burning and shining lamp.
2. To the objection concerning the disciples, it must be said that concerning none of the disciples was there any suspicion that he was the Christ; and because it was evident to all that they had followed Christ, everything that was in them — of holiness, of power, and of knowledge — they attributed to the Master. But John had not followed the Lord nor been His disciple.