Against the first view: future things cannot coexist with eternity before they exist (the post in the river)
Each of these views, however, seems to face no small difficulty. First, take the real presence of future things in eternity, meaning that they are thought to coexist with eternity itself from eternity. This is plainly a pure invention.
For one thing to coexist with another, both must exist; what does not exist cannot coexist. Since contingent things did not exist from eternity, they could not coexist with eternity from eternity.
The supposed indivisibility of eternity is no help here. Things that happen in time can coexist one after another with something that admits no division or succession within itself. A post driven fast into a river does not always have the same water flowing round it, but ever new water. It is no more necessary that what exists alongside God's eternity at some time should always coexist with it than that what coexists with his immensity in some place should coexist with it everywhere.
Latin
XXXVII. Sed singulae istae sententiae non parva difficultate laborare videntur. Primo enim quod attinet praesentiam illam realem futurorum in aeternitate, quatenus, scilicet, censentur ab aeterno aeternitati ipsi coexistere, apparet eam merum esse commentum. Nam ut unum alteri coexistat, necesse est ut existat utrumque. Quod enim non existit, coexistere non potest. Ac proinde cum res contingentes ab aeterno non extiterint, ab aeterno non potuerunt aeternitati coexistere. Neque quicquam ad hoc juvat, ea quae praesumitur aeternitatis indivisibilitas. Nam ei quod nullam admittit in se divisionem atque successionem, ea quae in tempore fiunt coexistere successive possunt. Quemadmodum palum in aqua defixum & immotum non eaedem aquae semper circumfluunt, sed perpetuo novae atque novae. Neque magis necesse est quod aeternitati Dei aliquando existit, semper illi coexistere; quam necesse est ut quod immensitati ejus alicubi coexistit, ubique illi coexistat.